In property crime cases, the key is how well the flow of money and the background of the deal can be explained

Fraud & Property Crimes Matters We Handle

1. Fraud — Deception, handing over property and the causal link between them are the issuesDeceiving a person into handing over property or obtaining a property interest is punishable under Article 347 of the Criminal Act by imprisonment for up to 20 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. Merely failing to repay borrowed money is not fraud; what is assessed is whether the person had the intent or ability to repay at the time of borrowing and whether he or she said things that were untrue.Analysis of how the contract came about and the conversations · Review of account flows and where the funds were used · Materials proving intent and ability to repay · Return of the money and settlement · Drafting the complaint and organizing evidence
2. Embezzlement — The position of holding another's property and unauthorized use are the issuesA person who holds another's property and embezzles it or refuses to return it is punishable under Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act by imprisonment for up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 15 million. Where the act violates occupational duties, the penalty under Article 356 is imprisonment for up to 10 years or a fine of up to KRW 30 million. The key points are whether there was a custodial relationship and whether there was intent to unlawfully appropriate the property.Review of the custodial relationship and the purpose of entrustment · Analysis of how company funds were used · Organizing the purpose of use and the scope of authority · Restitution and settlement · Responding to the criminal procedure
3. Breach of Trust — Breach of duty and whether property damage occurred are the issuesA person who handles another's affairs and, in breach of duty, obtains a property interest or causes a third party to obtain one, thereby causing damage to the principal, is punished with the same penalty as embezzlement under Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act. Disputed points include whether, in an ordinary contractual relationship, the person held a position of protecting and managing the other party's property, whether damage occurred, and whether it was a business judgment.Review of the position of handling another's affairs · Analysis of the contract structure and scope of duties · Review of whether damage occurred · Organizing business judgment materials · Responding to questioning by investigative agencies
4. Aggravated Punishment under the Specific Economic Crimes Act — If the gain is KRW 500 million or more, the statutory penalty rises sharplyIf the gain from fraud, computer-related fraud, extortion, or embezzlement or breach of trust is KRW 500 million or more, Article 3 of the Specific Economic Crimes Act applies. For a gain of KRW 5 billion or more, the penalty is life imprisonment or imprisonment for at least 5 years; for KRW 500 million or more but less than KRW 5 billion, imprisonment for a fixed term of at least 3 years; and a fine up to the amount of the gain may be added.Disputing the calculation of the gain · Analysis of accomplice relationships and roles · Responding to the detention warrant hearing · Repaying the damage and settlement · Review of the possibility of a suspended sentence (officially “suspension of execution of sentence”)
5. Investment, Jeonse, Voice Phishing and Other Types of Fraud — Evidence and remedies differ by typeEach type, such as investment 'leading rooms' (online stock tip chat rooms), jeonse (a lump-sum housing deposit lease) and romance scams, has a different fraud structure and a different way of recovering losses. Telecommunications financial fraud, in which victims are deceived by phone or text into transferring money, is governed by a separate special act, and the key is to request a payment suspension right after the loss. This type is explained separately in the voice phishing guide.Securing evidence by type · Requesting payment suspension and damage relief · Considering a complaint together with provisional attachment · Choosing between a compensation order and a civil lawsuit · Review of the liability of accomplices and participants

1. Elements of Property Crimes and How They Are Distinguished

Fraud requires a successive causal chain between deception, the victim's mistaken belief, an act of disposition handing over property or a property interest, and the acquisition of property. The Supreme Court en banc held that even if the victim did not understand the specific content and legal effect of the dispositive document, an intent to dispose is recognized if the victim was aware that he or she was signing or sealing the document.

Embezzlement is established when a person in the position of holding another's property disposes of it without authority or refuses to return it, and breach of trust is established when a person handling another's affairs breaches his or her duty and causes damage to the principal. In an ordinary contract where the parties' interests are opposed, a failure to perform the contract alone may not amount to embezzlement or breach of trust. The Supreme Court en banc held that where an assignor of a claim used money collected before the requirements for asserting the assignment against third parties were met, the assignor could not be regarded as holding it for the assignee, so embezzlement was not established.

• The line between civil and criminal · Failing to repay is in itself a breach of obligation; fraud becomes an issue if the person deceived the other party by pretending to have an intent or ability to repay that did not exist from the beginning.
• Crimes between relatives · Article 354 of the Criminal Act, on property crimes, applies Article 328 mutatis mutandis. Article 328 was amended on December 31, 2025 and now provides that for crimes between relatives, charges may be filed only upon a complaint.

2. Statutory Penalties and Aggravation Provisions

When fraud, embezzlement, breach of trust or similar crimes are committed habitually, the penalty is increased by up to one half of that prescribed for the crime (Article 351 of the Criminal Act), and attempts at fraud, quasi-fraud, computer-related fraud and similar crimes are also punishable (Article 352). Article 3(1) of the Specific Economic Crimes Act includes cases subject to habitual-offender aggravation, and a fine up to the amount of the gain may be added (Article 3(2)).

3. Complaint, Investigation and Trial Procedures

1. Filing the complaint · The victim submits a complaint to the judicial police officer. A document setting out in chronological order the time of the transactions, the amounts exchanged, what the other party said and objective records becomes the starting point of the investigation.
2. Investigation · The judicial police officer questions the complainant and the accused, checks bank transaction records, and analyzes call and messenger records.
3. Referral or non-referral · If the charge is supported, the case is referred to the prosecutor; otherwise, the documents are sent to the prosecutor with a written statement of reasons (Article 245-5 of the Criminal Procedure Act). The complainant may file an objection within 3 months from the date of receiving notice of non-referral, and once an objection is filed, the case is referred to the prosecutor (Article 245-7). If the non-referral is illegal or unjust, the prosecutor may request a reinvestigation (Article 245-8).
4. The prosecutor's decision and trial · The prosecutor requests supplementary investigation if necessary (Article 197-2) and decides whether to indict. The duties of prosecutors of the Prosecution Service include deciding whether to file and maintain charges and requesting warrants (Article 4 of the Prosecution Service Act).
5. Recovering losses · The victim applies for a compensation order during the criminal trial or files a separate civil lawsuit, and if assets need to be preserved, applies for provisional attachment at the same time.

4. How to Recover Losses

• Settlement and repayment · In criminal proceedings, repayment of the damage and settlement are heavily reflected in the disposition and sentencing.
• Compensation order · When pronouncing a guilty verdict for fraud, embezzlement, breach of trust and similar crimes, the court may, on its own motion or at the victim's application, order compensation for direct material damage (Article 25(1) of the Legal Proceedings Expedition Act). It is not allowed where the victim's name or address is unclear, the amount of damage is not specified, the existence or scope of liability is not clear, or there is a risk of significantly delaying the trial (Article 25(3)).
• Civil lawsuit and provisional attachment · If there is a risk that the other party's assets will be dispersed, apply for provisional attachment before the lawsuit to freeze the assets.
• Telecommunications financial fraud · If you were deceived by phone or text into sending money, a payment suspension and damage relief application come first.

5. If a Complaint Has Been Filed Against You

• Organizing the overall structure of the transaction · You need to be able to explain, by lining up contracts, loan agreements, conversation records and deposit and withdrawal records in chronological order, that you had no intent to deceive from the beginning.
• Explaining where the funds went · Showing with records where and how the money received was used helps in assessing intent and ability to repay and whether there was intent for embezzlement or breach of trust.
• Whether you are an accomplice · Even lending an account in your name or merely passing on money can make you a co-principal if you knew of the crime, so your role and degree of knowledge must be distinguished.
• Repayment and settlement · Presenting a repayment plan, even a partial one, and settling are reflected in the disposition and sentencing.
• Organizing statements · Review the records before questioning; you may also request counsel's presence at questioning by judicial police officers (Article 243-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act).

Key Court Decisions

Supreme Court en banc Decision 2016Do13362, decided February 16, 2017

The Court held that even if the deceived person did not understand the specific content and legal effect of the dispositive document, an act of disposition and an intent to dispose for purposes of fraud are recognized if the person was aware that he or she was signing or sealing the document.

Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Do3829, decided June 23, 2022

The Court held that even if an assignor of a claim used money collected before notice of the assignment, the assignor does not hold the money for the assignee, so embezzlement is not established.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Legal Guides

Criminal Defense Case Results

Written on the basis of Korean statutes in force (National Law Information Center, Ministry of Government Legislation) and court precedents as of October 20, 2026. Results may differ with amendments to the law or the facts of each case. This page is general information, not legal advice.

Written and reviewed by Attorney Dongwoo Shin — Ph.D. in Law; certified criminal law specialist and certified divorce law specialist registered with the Korean Bar Association. He handles each case personally from consultation to judgment. About the attorney →
Last updated October 20, 2026