SUCCESS CASE: Avoid Wrongful Punishment for Intimidation in Korea

Have you ever acquired a legal accusation for intimidation?

For those who’re studying this, you or somebody near you might have acquired a legal accusation for intimidation (협박죄) and need assistance. Do any of those conditions apply to you?

Going through police investigation after receiving a legal accusation
Apprehensive about making self-incriminating statements throughout investigation
Had no intention to threaten and wish to clarify your facet correctly
Wish to keep away from legal punishment in any respect prices

For those who’re a overseas nationwide, your considerations could also be even better. A legal document might have an effect on not solely your fame but in addition your visa standing, probably jeopardizing the educational or profession achievements you’ve in-built Korea.

Take 5 minutes to learn this text – you would possibly discover a option to keep away from unjust punishment.

Necessities and Penalties for Prison Threats

As you possibly can see, the legislation itself is temporary, and its interpretation has been developed by way of case legal guidelines. In line with the Supreme Court docket, legal intimidation requires:

An analysis of the connection between events
The circumstances on the time
The diploma of familiarity between events
Their relative positions
When third events are concerned, the connection between all events concerned

Whereas this would possibly sound advanced, it primarily means threatening somebody in a method that will moderately trigger worry. Notably, the sufferer’s precise worry is just not required for the crime to be established.

Let’s have a look at actual circumstances which have been determined by Korean courts.

Actual Instances

Case 1: An condominium resident instructed a safety guard “I’ll get you fired”, regardless of having no precise authority to take action. (Ulsan District Court docket 2021Godan2845)

Case 2: A police officer, on behalf of a good friend, instructed the funding recipient that he would “report back to greater authorities” if an funding wasn’t returned. (Supreme Court docket 2007Do606)

Case 3: An embezzling government notified their firm about plans to report inside misconduct to the Monetary Supervisory Service (금융감독원). (Supreme Court docket 2010Do1017)

Case 4:  An Air Power sergeant offered his superior with a doc of his misconduct and instructed him that if he didn’t admit to verbally abusing him, he would submit the doc to his superiors. (Supreme Court docket 2008Do8922)

Case 5: Workers instructed their CEO they might inform buyers about poor administration except he resigned. (Supreme Court docket 2022Do9187)

Does your state of affairs resemble any of those circumstances? You may be questioning which circumstances resulted in conviction.

Surprisingly, all circumstances besides the final one resulted in responsible verdicts. Even the final case was initially dominated responsible in each the primary and second trials however was overturned within the Supreme Court docket – a case that we SLG efficiently defended. 

And by reviewing the court docket’s standards for judgment, we will see how the next authorized rules are being utilized:

Missing precise authority or affect doesn’t forestall conviction if actions create the notion of such affect (e.g. Case 1. the safety guard case).

Sufferer testimony of no worry is just not adequate for acquittal if the act would ordinarily induce worry (e.g. Case 2. police demand for funding return).

Even authorized actions conveyed as a menace (like reporting to authorities) may be legal.

Complicated, proper? An absence of authority doesn’t matter; sufferer worry isn’t mandatory, and even lawful warnings typically might depend as threats. 

For foreigners, these nuanced requirements may be notably difficult to navigate. What may be thought of regular negotiation in your house nation may very well be considered as legal intimidation in Korea.

For those who had acquired a responsible verdict within the first or second trial, we will solely think about how overwhelming it should have felt. So, how did SLG persuade the Supreme Court docket?

Supreme Court docket Upholds SLG’s Argument

We totally researched favorable precedents, not solely from Korean courts but in addition from German Imperial Court docket circumstances that influenced Korean legislation. Whereas citing precedents is fundamental authorized work, not all legal professionals carry out this basic process equally effectively.

On the Supreme Court docket stage, the important thing isn’t discovering new information however figuring out errors in authorized interpretation from earlier trials. Strategic use of precedents is essential for achievement.

We proved why our shopper’s actions constituted warnings somewhat than threats by successfully using proof from decrease courts: 

We demonstrated that the corporate’s buyers had been already planning to get well their funding no matter our shopper’s actions 
We confirmed that our purchasers had been instantly fired by their CEO (the sufferer) after delivering the letter, proving that they had no actual affect 
We recognized translation errors within the unique English doc that had been misinterpreted as threats 

Allow us to share the ensuing Supreme Court docket ruling.

The Supreme Court docket in the end acknowledged our purchasers’ actions for what they had been: a professional, collective effort to revive correct enterprise operations. The Court docket acknowledged that reporting wage violations and informing stakeholders had been pure, anticipated procedures – merely warnings of foreseeable penalties somewhat than threats.

Key Steps for Responding to Intimidation Allegations. 

Let’s discover the suitable method to assist your case unfold extra easily.

First, early response is of utmost significance. 

Seek the advice of with an lawyer earlier than any police questioning. Your preliminary statements can have much more important implications than you would possibly count on. Keep away from making an attempt to resolve the difficulty alone or making an attempt to barter immediately with the complainant. Such actions might worsen your state of affairs.

Second, doc the legitimacy of your actions. Merely claiming innocence isn’t enough- it’s essential collect proof demonstrating lack of threatening intent. This would possibly embrace witness statements, recordings, or goal documentation of the opposite occasion’s responses.

Third, make the most of skilled help. For foreigners particularly, penalties can prolong past legal penalties to visa standing and immigration data. Attorneys do greater than interpret legal guidelines – they supply complete methods contemplating all features of your state of affairs. Early skilled steerage can assist keep away from pointless dangers.

And right here is the ultimate tip: Prison intimidation circumstances usually contain subjective interpretations even among the many identical language customers. So discovering attorneys with sturdy English proficiency and communication abilities is important, notably for intimidation circumstances. 

For additional info, please discuss with the articles under.

For those who surprise how English talking legal professionals may be the make-or-break think about your Korean authorized battle, click on this: