{"id":315,"date":"2025-12-26T07:22:03","date_gmt":"2025-12-26T07:22:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/?p=315"},"modified":"2026-08-15T12:10:27","modified_gmt":"2026-08-15T12:10:27","slug":"real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><!--  --><!--  --><br \/>\n<!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_START --><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"Article\",\"headline\":\"Can You Get a Partial Acquittal in Real Estate Fraud Cases in South Korea? A Case of Failed Proof of Deception\",\"description\":\"Analysis of a partial acquittal in a real estate fraud case where the prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment.\",\"author\":{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/taejin-kim\/#person\",\"name\":\"\uae40\ud0dc\uc9c4\",\"alternateName\":\"Taejin Kim\",\"jobTitle\":\"\ub300\ud45c\ubcc0\ud638\uc0ac (Managing Partner)\",\"worksFor\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\"}},\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"LegalService\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-26\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-12-26\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case#webpage\"},\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case#article\",\"keywords\":[],\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\"}<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"FAQPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case#faqpage\",\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"mainEntity\":[{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Can you receive a partial acquittal in real estate fraud cases in South Korea?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes, it is possible. If the evidence submitted by the prosecutor fails to prove deceptive conduct and intent to defraud beyond a reasonable doubt, an acquittal can be rendered. Atlas Legal recently obtained an acquittal for approximately KRW 400 million worth of fraud charges at Incheon District Court.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"When is fraud not established even when borrowed money was received?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"If it cannot be proven that money was received for a specific purpose (e.g., contract deposit for property sale), and there is a possibility that the money was delivered without specifying its purpose based on a trust relationship between the parties, deceptive conduct may not be recognized, resulting in acquittal.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What is the 'in dubio pro reo' principle in South Korean criminal law?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"In criminal trials, a guilty verdict must be based on evidence that gives the judge conviction beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged facts are true. If such level of proof is not established, the judgment must be made in favor of the defendant (Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11771, February 26, 2015).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What is the legal significance when the purpose of borrowing is deleted from a promissory note?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"If the specific purpose stated on a promissory note was deleted at the time of its creation, it becomes difficult to conclude that the money was delivered for that specific purpose. This significantly impacts the proof of deceptive conduct.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"How is 'intent to defraud' as a subjective element of fraud determined in South Korea?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Unless the defendant confesses, the intent to defraud can only be determined by comprehensively considering objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial status, environment, content of the crime, and the process of transaction performance before and after the crime. Fraud can also be established by dolus eventualis (conditional intent) (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416, February 28, 2008).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"How is it interpreted when the defendant transferred money to the victim's daughter's account?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"When the bank record shows no actual sender name and only indicates the victim as the depositor, the fact that the defendant\u2014who could not have known the victim's daughter's account number\u2014was able to transfer money to that account suggests that the victim provided the account number. This supports the existence of a trust relationship between the parties.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What provision applies when acquittal is due to insufficient proof by the prosecutor?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"When there is no proof of criminal facts, acquittal is pronounced under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Why is hiring a lawyer important in real estate fraud cases in South Korea?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Real estate fraud cases involve complex transaction relationships and numerous pieces of evidence. It is crucial to identify insufficiently proven aspects of the prosecution's charges and apply appropriate legal principles for defense. Through the assistance of a specialized attorney, partial or full acquittal can be achieved.\"}}]}<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":[\"LegalService\",\"LocalBusiness\"],\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"alternateName\":[\"Atlas Legal\",\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4(\uad6c \ucf00\uc774\uc564\ud53c)\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/\",\"telephone\":\"+82-32-864-8300\",\"email\":\"info@atlaw.kr\",\"priceRange\":\"\u20a9\u20a9\u20a9\",\"address\":{\"@type\":\"PostalAddress\",\"streetAddress\":\"\uc778\ucc9c\ud0c0\uc6cc\ub300\ub85c 323, B\ub3d9 2901\ud638 (\uc1a1\ub3c4\ub3d9, \uc13c\ud2b8\ub85c\ub4dc)\",\"addressLocality\":\"\uc778\ucc9c\uad11\uc5ed\uc2dc \uc5f0\uc218\uad6c\",\"addressRegion\":\"\uc778\ucc9c\uad11\uc5ed\uc2dc\",\"postalCode\":\"22007\",\"addressCountry\":\"KR\"},\"geo\":{\"@type\":\"GeoCoordinates\",\"latitude\":37.399438,\"longitude\":126.629812},\"openingHoursSpecification\":[{\"@type\":\"OpeningHoursSpecification\",\"dayOfWeek\":[\"Monday\",\"Tuesday\",\"Wednesday\",\"Thursday\",\"Friday\"],\"opens\":\"09:00\",\"closes\":\"18:00\"}],\"areaServed\":[{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\ub300\ud55c\ubbfc\uad6d\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uc778\ucc9c\uad11\uc5ed\uc2dc\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uc11c\uc6b8\ud2b9\ubcc4\uc2dc\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uacbd\uae30\ub3c4\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uc1a1\ub3c4\uad6d\uc81c\uc5c5\ubb34\uc9c0\uad6c\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uccad\ub77c\uad6d\uc81c\ub3c4\uc2dc\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"\uc601\uc885\uad6d\uc81c\ub3c4\uc2dc\"}]}<\/script><br \/>\n<!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_END --><\/p>\n<style>@import url('https:\/\/cdn.jsdelivr.net\/gh\/orioncactus\/pretendard@v1.3.9\/dist\/web\/static\/pretendard.css'); \/* \u2500\u2500 Kadence \ud14c\ub9c8 \ucee8\ud150\uce20 \ud3ed override \u2500\u2500 *\/ :root { --global-content-narrow-width: 1290px !important; } .entry-content-wrap { max-width: 1290px !important; } *, *::before, *::after { box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0; padding: 0; } :root { --navy: #0a2540; --navy2: #1a3353; --wine: #722f37; --text: #1a1f36; --muted: #697386; --rule: #e3e8ee; } body { font-family: 'Pretendard', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Apple SD Gothic Neo', sans-serif; background: #fff; color: var(--text); font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.82; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \ud788\uc5b4\ub85c \u2500\u2500 *\/ .hero { max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 72px 48px 48px; text-align: center; } .category-tag { font-size: 11px; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: 1.5px; text-transform: uppercase; color: var(--wine); display: block; margin-bottom: 20px; } .hero h1 { font-size: 44px; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1.22; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 28px; word-break: keep-all; } .hero-title { font-size: 44px; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1.22; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 28px; word-break: keep-all; } .hero-meta { display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; gap: 12px; padding-bottom: 40px; border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); } .hero-info { font-size: 13.5px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.4; } .hero-info strong { color: var(--text); font-weight: 500; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \ubcf8\ubb38 \u2500\u2500 *\/ .content { max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 52px 48px 100px; } \/* \ubaa9\ucc28 *\/ .toc-nav { margin-bottom: 60px; border: 1px solid #d0d5dd; border-radius: 6px; padding: 28px 32px; } .toc-label { font-size: 20px; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: 0; text-transform: none; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 14px; } .toc-nav ol { list-style: none; padding-left: 0; } .toc-nav ol li { display: flex; gap: 14px; align-items: baseline; padding: 6px 0; font-size: 17px; } .toc-nav ol li::before { content: none; } .toc-nav ol li a { color: var(--text); text-decoration: none; font-weight: 400; } .toc-nav ol li a:hover { color: var(--wine); } \/* \ub9ac\ub4dc\u00b7\uc694\uc57d\u00b7\ucee8\ud14d\uc2a4\ud2b8 \ud14d\uc2a4\ud2b8 \u2014 \ubc30\uacbd\u00b7\uc120 \uc5c6\uc74c *\/ .lead-text { font-size: 20px; font-weight: 400; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 24px; } .summary-text { font-size: 18px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 20px; } .context-text { font-size: 17px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 52px; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \uc81c\ubaa9 \u2500\u2500 *\/ h2 { font-size: 30px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--wine); margin: 68px 0 16px; word-break: keep-all; } h3 { font-size: 17px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--wine); margin: 38px 0 10px; } p { font-size: 18px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.82; margin-bottom: 18px; } \/* \uc774\ubbf8\uc9c0 \u2014 \ubcf8\ubb38 \ud3ed\ubcf4\ub2e4 \uc881\uc740 \uc0ac\uc9c4\ub3c4 \uac00\uc6b4\ub370\ub85c (\ud14c\ub9c8\uac00 img{display:block} \uc774\ub77c text-align:center \ub85c\ub294 \uc548 \ub428). author-avatar\u00b7asg-step-img \ub294 \ubcc4\ub3c4 \ubc30\uce58\ub77c \uc81c\uc678 *\/ .content img:not(.author-avatar):not(.asg-step-img) { display: block; max-width: 100%; height: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; } \/* \ud45c *\/ table { width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; margin: 24px 0; font-size: 14px; } thead tr { background: #fff; } th { color: var(--navy); font-weight: 600; padding: 11px 16px; text-align: left; font-size: 16px; border-bottom: 2px solid var(--navy); } td { padding: 12px 16px; border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); color: var(--text); font-size: 16px; } tbody tr:hover { background: #f6f9fc; } \/* \ubd88\ub9bf \ub9ac\uc2a4\ud2b8 *\/ ul, ol:not(.toc-nav ol) { padding-left: 20px; margin-bottom: 16px; } li { font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.78; margin-bottom: 6px; color: var(--text); } \/* \uacc4\uc0b0 \uacf5\uc2dd \u2014 \uc720\uc77c\ud55c \uc0c9\uc0c1 \ube14\ub85d *\/ .formula { display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 8px; background: #f6f9fc; border: 1px solid var(--rule); border-radius: 8px; padding: 28px 24px; margin: 32px 0; flex-wrap: wrap; justify-content: center; } .f-item { text-align: center; padding: 12px 18px; background: #fff; border: 1px solid var(--rule); border-radius: 5px; } .f-result { background: #fff; border: 2px solid var(--navy); } .f-num { font-size: 22px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--navy); line-height: 1.2; } .f-result .f-num { color: var(--wine); } .f-label { font-size: 11px; color: var(--text); margin-top: 4px; } .f-op { font-size: 20px; color: var(--text); padding: 0 2px; font-weight: 300; } \/* FAQ \u2014 \uc120 \uad6c\ubd84\ub9cc *\/ .faq-item { border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); padding: 22px 0; } .faq-item:last-of-type { border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); } .faq-q { font-size: 17px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 8px !important; } .faq-item p:not(.faq-q) { font-size: 17px; color: var(--text); margin: 0; line-height: 1.75; } \/* \ub9c8\ubb34\ub9ac \ubb38\uc7a5 *\/ p.closing { font-size: 15.5px; color: var(--text); margin: 40px 0 0; padding-top: 32px; border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); } \/* \uc800\uc790 *\/ .author-box { display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 14px; padding-top: 40px; margin-top: 40px; border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); } .author-avatar { width: 56px; height: 56px; border-radius: 50%; object-fit: cover; flex-shrink: 0; align-self: flex-start; } .author-text { flex: 1; } .author-name { font-size: 18px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--navy); } .author-meta { font-size: 13px; color: var(--text); margin-top: 2px; } .author-link { display: inline-block; margin-top: 8px; font-size: 15px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--wine); text-decoration: none; } .author-link:hover { text-decoration: underline; } .author-section-label { font-size: 15px; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: 1px; text-transform: uppercase; color: var(--muted); margin-bottom: 8px; } .author-detail { font-size: 16px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.7; margin-bottom: 1px; } @media (max-width: 640px) { body { font-size: 15px; } p { font-size: 15px; } li { font-size: 15px; } .hero { padding: 32px 14px 24px; } .hero h1 { font-size: 22px; } .hero-title { font-size: 22px; } .hero-info { font-size: 12px; } .content { padding: 28px 0 60px; } .toc-nav { margin-left: -14px; margin-right: -14px; border-radius: 0; border-left: none; border-right: none; padding: 12px 4px; margin-bottom: 28px; } .toc-label { font-size: 16px; } .toc-nav ol li { font-size: 14px; padding: 3px 0; } h2 { font-size: 20px; margin: 44px 0 10px; } h3 { font-size: 15px; margin: 24px 0 8px; } .lead-text { font-size: 16px; } .summary-text { font-size: 15px; } .context-text { font-size: 14px; } .formula { flex-direction: column; padding: 16px 12px; } .f-num { font-size: 18px; } th { font-size: 13px; padding: 8px 10px; } td { font-size: 13px; padding: 8px 10px; } .faq-q { font-size: 14px; } .faq-item p:not(.faq-q) { font-size: 14px; } .author-box { display: block; overflow: hidden; } .author-avatar { float: left; width: 36px; height: 36px; margin-right: 10px; border-radius: 50%; } .author-section-label { display: inline; font-size: 11px; letter-spacing: 0; margin: 0 3px 0 0; } .author-name { display: inline; font-size: 14px; } .author-detail { clear: both; font-size: 13px; line-height: 1.55; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 1px; } .author-detail ~ .author-detail { clear: none; margin-top: 2px; } .author-link { clear: both; display: block; font-size: 13px; margin-top: 8px; } p.closing { font-size: 14px; } }<\/style>\n<style>\/* ATLAS legacy-content classes (migrated old format) -- gray boxes on white *\/ .direct-answer{background:#f5f5f5;border:1px solid var(--rule);border-radius:8px;padding:20px 24px;margin:0 0 24px;font-weight:500;color:var(--text);line-height:1.8;} .story-hook{background:#f5f5f5;border:1px solid var(--rule);border-radius:8px;padding:18px 22px;margin:0 0 22px;} .story-hook p{font-size:17px;color:var(--text);line-height:1.75;margin:0;} .story-detail{background:#f5f5f5;border:1px solid var(--rule);border-radius:8px;padding:22px 24px;margin:24px 0;} .story-detail h3{margin-top:0;} .statute-box{background:#f5f5f5;border:1px solid var(--rule);border-radius:8px;padding:18px 22px;margin:18px 0 22px;font-size:16px;line-height:1.7;} .statute-box .statute-title{font-weight:700;color:var(--navy);font-size:16px;margin-bottom:8px;display:block;} .statute-box .statute-text{color:var(--text);font-size:16px;margin:0;line-height:1.7;white-space:pre-line;} .statute-box .statute-text + .statute-title{margin-top:12px;} .statute-box .statute-source-title{font-weight:700;color:var(--muted);font-size:14px;margin-top:14px;margin-bottom:4px;display:block;} .statute-box .statute-source-text{color:var(--muted);font-size:14px;margin:0;line-height:1.5;font-style:italic;} .disclaimer{font-size:15px;color:var(--muted);font-style:italic;margin-bottom:15px;} figure{margin:24px 0;}figure img{max-width:100%;height:auto;border-radius:8px;} figcaption{font-size:13.5px;color:var(--muted);text-align:center;margin-top:8px;} @media (max-width:640px){.story-hook p,.statute-box{font-size:14px;}}<\/style>\n<div class=\"content\">\n<div class=\"hero\">\n<div class=\"hero-title\">Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case<\/div>\n<div class=\"hero-meta\">\n<div class=\"hero-info\">\n      <strong>Taejin Kim<\/strong> \u00b7 Managing Partner, Atlas Legal\n    <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"toc-nav\">\n<p class=\"toc-label\">Contents<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#section1\">1. Is Partial Acquittal Possible in Real Estate Fraud Cases?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section2\">2. Case Overview and Prosecution&#8217;s Charges<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section3\">3. Defense Counsel&#8217;s Key Arguments<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section4\">4. Court&#8217;s Grounds for Acquittal<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section5\">5. Critical Evidence Analysis: Deleted Text on Promissory Note<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section6\">6. Legal Implications of Failed Proof of Deception<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section7\">7. Practical Implications of This Judgment<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section8\">8. FAQ<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol><\/div>\n<div class=\"related-links\">\n<h3>Related Contents<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><a style=\"text-decoration:none\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/category\/criminal\/\">Atlas Legal Corporate Crime Practice<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div class=\"lead-text\">\n<p><strong>Actual Case:<\/strong> A client facing four counts of real estate fraud. The prosecution alleged that the defendant defrauded Victim B of KRW 300 million as a deposit for property sale and KRW 100 million as sale-related expenses. Atlas Legal focused on deleted text in the promissory note and the trust relationship between the parties. In December 2025, Incheon District Court rendered an acquittal on these charges.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"direct-answer\">\n        <strong>Key Answer:<\/strong> A partial acquittal is possible in real estate fraud cases in South Korea. In criminal trials, a conviction must be based on evidence that gives the judge conviction beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged facts are true (Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11771, February 26, 2015). If the prosecutor fails to prove that borrowed money was delivered for a specific purpose (such as property sale deposit), deceptive conduct is not established and acquittal follows. Atlas Legal recently obtained an acquittal on KRW 400 million worth of fraud charges in Incheon District Court Case No. XXXX.\n    <\/div>\n<div class=\"story-detail\">\n<h3>The Prosecution&#8217;s Indictment and Defense Counsel&#8217;s Counterargument<\/h3>\n<p class=\"disclaimer\">\u203b This case is based on Incheon District Court Case No. XXXX (Judgment rendered December 18, 2025). Personal information of the client and related parties has been anonymized.<\/p>\n<p>The prosecution charged Defendant A with defrauding Victim B of a total of KRW 400 million on May 31 and June 1, 2021, claiming it was for a deposit and expenses related to purchasing unsold commercial units in Daejeon. However, Atlas Legal meticulously analyzed the key evidence\u2014the promissory note. The typed text stating &#8220;to be used as deposit for Property C unsold commercial units in Seo-gu, Daejeon&#8221; had been crossed out with a pen, with the defendant&#8217;s seal stamped over it. This indicated that the money was delivered without specifying its purpose at the time of borrowing. The court accepted defense counsel&#8217;s arguments and rendered an acquittal on these charges. We will now explain in detail the legal principles and evidence analysis behind the court&#8217;s acquittal decision.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section1\">1. Is Partial Acquittal Possible in Real Estate Fraud Cases?<\/h2>\n<h3>Presumption of Innocence and Burden of Proof<\/h3>\n<p>Partial acquittal in real estate fraud cases is entirely possible in South Korea. This is because the fundamental principles of criminal trials\u2014the presumption of innocence and the &#8220;in dubio pro reo&#8221; (when in doubt, rule in favor of the defendant) principle\u2014apply.<\/p>\n<p>Article 27(4) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that &#8220;The accused shall be presumed innocent until a judgment of guilt has been pronounced,&#8221; and Article 275-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act states the same principle. As a fundamental principle of the rule of law inherent in these constitutional and criminal procedural provisions, if the prosecutor fails to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the judgment must be made in favor of the defendant.<\/p>\n<h3>Supreme Court Precedent Standards<\/h3>\n<p>The Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11771 (February 26, 2015) clearly established this principle.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;In criminal trials, a finding of guilt must be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to give the judge conviction beyond reasonable doubt that the charged facts are true. If evidence establishing such level of proof is lacking, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant, the judgment must be made in favor of the defendant.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<p>In other words, if the evidence submitted by the prosecutor fails to prove deceptive conduct and intent to defraud beyond reasonable doubt, an acquittal must be rendered. This very principle was applied in the case handled by Atlas Legal.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section2\">2. Case Overview and Prosecution&#8217;s Charges<\/h2>\n<h3>Overall Structure of the Case<\/h3>\n<p>This case was a complex real estate fraud case where Incheon District Court Case No. XXXX and three other cases were consolidated. Defendant A was indicted on multiple charges including fraud, forgery of private documents by impersonation, uttering of forged documents, embezzlement (recognized charge: fraud), and violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.<\/p>\n<h3>Charges on Which Acquittal Was Rendered<\/h3>\n<p>The acquittal portion discussed in this article concerns the fraud charges against Victim B dated May 31, 2021 and June 1, 2021.<\/p>\n<p>According to the prosecution&#8217;s charges, on May 31, 2021, at Victim B&#8217;s residence, Defendant A allegedly made false statements to the effect that &#8220;I am trying to purchase all unsold commercial units in Daejeon, and first need KRW 300 million as a deposit. If you lend me KRW 300 million, I will repay KRW 600 million by August 31, 2021,&#8221; thereby receiving cashier&#8217;s checks worth KRW 300 million as borrowed funds.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, on June 1, 2021, at the same location, the defendant allegedly stated &#8220;I have contracted for the Daejeon unsold commercial units. About KRW 200 million is needed for sale-related expenses. If you lend me the sale expenses, I will definitely repay by August 5, 2021,&#8221; thereby receiving a transfer of KRW 100 million on June 10, 2021.<\/p>\n<h3>Judgment Result<\/h3>\n<p>In its judgment rendered on December 18, 2025, Incheon District Court sentenced Defendant A to one year of imprisonment, but rendered acquittal on the fraud charges dated May 31, 2021 and June 1, 2021.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section3\">3. Defense Counsel&#8217;s Key Arguments<\/h2>\n<h3>Absence of Intent to Defraud<\/h3>\n<p>Atlas Legal presented the following key arguments in the fraud case against Victim B.<\/p>\n<p>First, Defendant A had entered into a real estate exchange contract with Non-party D regarding land located in Jangho-won-eup, Icheon-si (hereinafter &#8220;the Subject Land&#8221;), and believed that D had authority to dispose of the Subject Land. Therefore, there was no intent to defraud in entering into the sales contract with Victim B.<\/p>\n<h3>Absence of Deceptive Conduct<\/h3>\n<p>Second, Defendant A borrowed KRW 300 million from Victim B for real estate business purposes without limiting the purpose to matters related to the Daejeon unsold commercial units, and therefore there was no deceptive conduct against Victim B.<\/p>\n<p>Third, Defendant A borrowed KRW 100 million from Victim B for screen golf facility operating expenses, and therefore there was no deceptive conduct against Victim B.<\/p>\n<h3>Core Defense Strategy<\/h3>\n<p>The core defense strategy was to attack the &#8220;insufficiency of the prosecution&#8217;s proof.&#8221; The evidence submitted by the prosecutor was insufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Defendant A received KRW 300 million from Victim B &#8220;for the deposit for Daejeon unsold commercial units&#8221; and KRW 100 million &#8220;for sale-related expenses.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section4\">4. Court&#8217;s Grounds for Acquittal<\/h2>\n<h3>Subjective Elements of Fraud<\/h3>\n<p>The court first confirmed the legal principles of fraud. Citing Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416 (February 28, 2008) and Supreme Court Decision 2008Do443 (March 27, 2008), it stated as follows.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;The intent to defraud as a subjective element of fraud can only be determined, unless the defendant confesses, by comprehensively considering objective circumstances such as the defendant&#8217;s financial status, environment, content of the crime, and the process of transaction performance before and after the crime. Fraud can also be established by dolus eventualis (conditional intent).&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Standard for Determining Dolus Eventualis<\/h3>\n<p>The court also presented the standard for determining dolus eventualis. Citing Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8726 (August 21, 2008), it stated as follows.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;Dolus eventualis as a subjective element of criminal elements refers to a situation where one perceives the possibility of criminal facts occurring as uncertain while accepting it. To find dolus eventualis, there must not only be awareness of the possibility of criminal facts occurring, but also an internal intention to accept the risk of criminal facts occurring. Whether the actor was accepting the possibility of criminal facts occurring must be inferred from the actor&#8217;s perspective by examining the form of conduct as it appeared externally, the circumstances of the conduct, and other specific facts, while considering how an ordinary person would evaluate the possibility of the criminal facts occurring.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Conclusion on Acquittal<\/h3>\n<p>Applying the above legal principles, the court determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was insufficient to recognize that Defendant A received KRW 300 million from Victim B for the deposit for Daejeon unsold commercial units, or that the defendant received KRW 100 million for expenses related to the sale of Daejeon unsold commercial units, and there was no other evidence to recognize such facts.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, as each of these charged facts constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts, the court rendered acquittal for Defendant A under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section5\">5. Critical Evidence Analysis: Deleted Text on Promissory Note<\/h2>\n<h3>Decisive Evidence in the Promissory Note<\/h3>\n<p>The key evidence in this case was the promissory note (cash custody receipt) dated May 31, 2021. The court meticulously analyzed this promissory note.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;On the promissory note (cash custody receipt) dated May 31, 2021, typed text stating &#8216;The above borrowed amount will be used as deposit for Property C unsold commercial units in Seo-gu, Daejeon. (Unsold unit details and related documents attached)&#8217; was present, but the text had been crossed out with a pen, and the defendant&#8217;s seal was stamped over it.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Determination of When Deletion Occurred<\/h3>\n<p>The court analyzed when this deletion was made.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;Synthesizing the statements of Defendant A, Victim B, and Non-party E, who were involved in preparing this promissory note, the defendant brought the promissory note, and on May 31, 2021, met Victim B and modified the promissory note as described above while receiving checks worth KRW 300 million from Victim B. There is no circumstance to suggest that the promissory note was unilaterally or subsequently modified by the defendant and others. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the text portion corresponding to the borrowing purpose on the promissory note was deleted at the time of preparing the promissory note and delivering the borrowed funds.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Significance of Evidence Analysis<\/h3>\n<p>This analysis is important because if the &#8220;deposit for Daejeon unsold commercial units&#8221; portion was deleted at the time of preparing the promissory note, it cannot be concluded that Victim B delivered the money for that purpose. In other words, the core of the &#8220;deceptive conduct&#8221; alleged by the prosecution\u2014that the defendant &#8220;lied by claiming it was for the sale deposit&#8221;\u2014is not proven.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section6\">6. Legal Implications of Failed Proof of Deception<\/h2>\n<h3>Determination on Additional Borrowed Funds<\/h3>\n<p>The court also determined that proof of deceptive conduct was insufficient for the KRW 100 million borrowed on June 1, 2021.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;Furthermore, considering that Defendant A and Victim B deleted the borrowing purpose from the promissory note on May 31, 2021 and did not specify any other purpose; that Victim B&#8217;s statement regarding the circumstances under which the defendant requested to borrow about KRW 200 million additionally on June 1, 2021 is not specific; and that the promissory note dated June 10, 2021 that Defendant A provided to Victim B also did not state any borrowing purpose\u2014there is insufficient evidence to recognize that Defendant A definitively told Victim B on June 1, 2021 that the defendant had contracted for the Daejeon unsold commercial units and needed KRW 200 million for sale-related expenses, and there is no other evidence to recognize such facts.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Trust Relationship Between the Parties<\/h3>\n<p>The court also noted the trust relationship between Defendant A and Victim B.<\/p>\n<div class=\"judgment-quote\">\n        &#8220;Additionally, synthesizing the statements of Non-party E and Non-party F, it appears that Victim B frequently visited the screen golf facility office operated by Defendant A at the time. Given the deep trust relationship between Defendant A and Victim B at the time, the possibility cannot be excluded that Victim B delivered the money without specifying a particular purpose, intending for Defendant A to use it for the sale business or screen golf facility operation that the defendant was conducting.&#8221;\n    <\/div>\n<h3>Trust Relationship Evidenced by Transfer Circumstances<\/h3>\n<p>The court also noted the circumstances under which Defendant A transferred money to Victim B&#8217;s daughter&#8217;s account. According to the bank records, the actual sender&#8217;s name was not recorded, and Victim B was indicated as the depositor. The fact that Defendant A\u2014who could not have known Victim B&#8217;s daughter&#8217;s account number\u2014was able to transfer money to that account can only mean that Victim B directly provided the daughter&#8217;s account number to Defendant A. This circumstance supports that a trust relationship had been formed between Defendant A and Victim B, and that they had a relationship of providing funds without specifying their purpose.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section7\">7. Practical Implications of This Judgment<\/h2>\n<h3>Importance of Evidence Analysis<\/h3>\n<p>This judgment demonstrates how important evidence analysis is in real estate fraud cases. A single deleted text on a promissory note became the decisive basis for acquittal. Such a result would have been difficult to achieve if defense counsel had not meticulously analyzed the evidence.<\/p>\n<h3>Strictness of Proving Deceptive Conduct<\/h3>\n<p>In fraud cases, deceptive conduct is not established simply by the fact that money was received. It must be proven beyond reasonable doubt what specific lies the defendant told and whether the victim was deceived by those lies and delivered the money.<\/p>\n<h3>Consideration of Party Relationships<\/h3>\n<p>The court considered the trust relationship between Defendant A and Victim B. If there is a trust relationship between two parties and there is a possibility that money was delivered without specifying its purpose, it becomes difficult to recognize the &#8220;deceptive conduct for a specific purpose&#8221; alleged by the prosecution.<\/p>\n<h3>Role of Specialized Legal Counsel<\/h3>\n<p>Real estate fraud cases involve complex transaction relationships and numerous pieces of evidence. It is the role of specialized legal counsel to identify insufficiently proven aspects of the prosecution&#8217;s charges and apply appropriate legal principles for defense. In this case, Atlas Legal identified the deleted text on the promissory note as key evidence and achieved a partial acquittal.<\/p>\n<p>Atlas Legal provides legal services in corporate advisory, corporate disputes, corporate consulting, and corporate crime (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, embezzlement, tax law, customs law) in Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. Based on extensive experience in defending real estate fraud cases, we provide the best results for our clients.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section8\">8. FAQ<\/h2>\n<div class=\"faq-block\">\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q1. Can you receive a partial acquittal in real estate fraud cases in South Korea?<\/p>\n<p>A. Yes, it is possible. If the evidence submitted by the prosecutor fails to prove deceptive conduct and intent to defraud beyond reasonable doubt, an acquittal can be rendered. Atlas Legal recently obtained an acquittal on KRW 400 million worth of fraud charges at Incheon District Court (Case No. XXXX, judgment rendered December 18, 2025).<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q2. When is fraud not established even when borrowed money was received?<\/p>\n<p>A. If it cannot be proven that money was received for a specific purpose (e.g., property sale deposit) at the time of borrowing, and there is a possibility that the money was delivered without specifying its purpose based on a trust relationship between the parties, deceptive conduct may not be recognized, resulting in acquittal.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q3. What is the &#8220;in dubio pro reo&#8221; principle in South Korean criminal law?<\/p>\n<p>A. In criminal trials, a finding of guilt must be based on evidence that gives the judge conviction beyond reasonable doubt that the charged facts are true. If such level of proof is not established, the judgment must be made in favor of the defendant (Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11771, February 26, 2015).<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q4. What is the legal significance when the purpose of borrowing is deleted from a promissory note?<\/p>\n<p>A. If the specific purpose stated on a promissory note was deleted at the time of its creation, it becomes difficult to conclude that the money was delivered for that specific purpose. In this case, the court found that the &#8220;deposit for Daejeon unsold commercial units&#8221; text was deleted at the time of creating the promissory note, and therefore did not recognize the prosecution&#8217;s alleged deceptive conduct.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q5. How is &#8220;intent to defraud&#8221; determined in South Korean fraud cases?<\/p>\n<p>A. Unless the defendant confesses, the intent to defraud can only be determined by comprehensively considering objective circumstances such as the defendant&#8217;s financial status, environment, content of the crime, and the process of transaction performance before and after the crime. Fraud can also be established by dolus eventualis (conditional intent) (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416, February 28, 2008).<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q6. How is it interpreted when the defendant transferred money to the victim&#8217;s daughter&#8217;s account?<\/p>\n<p>A. When the bank record shows no actual sender name and only indicates the victim as the depositor, the fact that the defendant\u2014who could not have known the victim&#8217;s daughter&#8217;s account number\u2014was able to transfer money to that account suggests that the victim provided the account number. This supports the existence of a trust relationship between the parties.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q7. What provision applies when acquittal is due to insufficient proof by the prosecutor?<\/p>\n<p>A. When there is no proof of criminal facts, acquittal is pronounced under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea. In this case, the court also stated that &#8220;as each of these charged facts constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts, the court renders acquittal for the defendant under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q8. Why is hiring a lawyer important in real estate fraud cases in South Korea?<\/p>\n<p>A. Real estate fraud cases involve complex transaction relationships and numerous pieces of evidence. It is crucial to identify insufficiently proven aspects of the prosecution&#8217;s charges and apply appropriate legal principles for defense. Through the assistance of a specialized attorney, partial or full acquittal can be achieved. In this case, Atlas Legal identified the deleted text on the promissory note and achieved an acquittal.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Atlas Legal provides legal services in corporate advisory, corporate disputes, corporate consulting, and corporate crime (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, embezzlement, tax law, customs law) in Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. In Incheon District Court Case No. XXXX (judgment rendered December 18, 2025), we represented Defendant A and obtained acquittal on the fraud charges against Victim B for KRW 300 million dated May 31, 2021 and KRW 100 million dated June 1, 2021. If you need specialized legal advice on real estate fraud cases, please contact Atlas Legal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"disclaimer\" style=\"margin: 20px 0;\">\u203b This case is based on Incheon District Court Case No. XXXX (Judgment rendered December 18, 2025). Personal information of the client and related parties has been anonymized.<\/p>\n<div class=\"author-box\">\n<img decoding=\"async\" class=\"author-avatar\" src=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/\uae40\ud0dc\uc9c4-1.png\" alt=\"Taejin Kim, Managing Partner \u2014 Atlas Legal\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"author-text\">\n<div class=\"author-section-label\">About the Author<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-name\">Taejin Kim | Managing Partner<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Corporate Counseling, Corporate Disputes, White-Collar Crime<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Former Public Prosecutor | Judicial Research and Training Institute, 33rd Class<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Korea University LL.B. &amp; LL.M. (Criminal Law), University of California, Davis LL.M.<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Atlas Legal | Incheon Songdo, South Korea<\/div>\n<p><a class=\"author-link\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Visit Atlas Legal Homepage \u2192<\/a>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_post_transparent":"default","_kad_post_title":"default","_kad_post_layout":"default","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"default","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"default","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16,224],"tags":[249,310,309,308,306,307],"class_list":["post-315","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-criminal","category-white-collar-crime","tag-atlaslegal","tag-borrowedfundsfraud","tag-deceptiveconduct","tag-frauddefensesouthkorea","tag-real-estate-fraud-acquittal-borrowing-purpose-not-proven-south-korea","tag-realestatefraudacquittal"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.5 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Atlas Legal Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/cropped-\uc2ac\ub77c\uc774\ub4dc6-1.png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\"},\"headline\":\"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3053,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"AtlasLegal\",\"BorrowedFundsFraud\",\"DeceptiveConduct\",\"FraudDefenseSouthKorea\",\"real-estate-fraud-acquittal-borrowing-purpose-not-proven-south-korea\",\"RealEstateFraudAcquittal\"],\"articleSection\":[\"White Collar Crime\",\"White-Collar Crime\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/\",\"name\":\"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00\",\"description\":\"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"\ud648\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"width\":540,\"height\":485,\"caption\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\",\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/author\\\/prinz001\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal","description":"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal","og_description":"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr","og_url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/","og_site_name":"Atlas Legal Blog","article_published_time":"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/cropped-\uc2ac\ub77c\uc774\ub4dc6-1.png","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/"},"author":{"name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55"},"headline":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case","datePublished":"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/"},"wordCount":3053,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["AtlasLegal","BorrowedFundsFraud","DeceptiveConduct","FraudDefenseSouthKorea","real-estate-fraud-acquittal-borrowing-purpose-not-proven-south-korea","RealEstateFraudAcquittal"],"articleSection":["White Collar Crime","White-Collar Crime"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/","name":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case | Atlas Legal","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-12-26T07:22:03+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-15T12:10:27+00:00","description":"Analysis of partial acquittal in real estate fraud case where prosecution failed to prove deceptive conduct regarding KRW 400 million borrowed funds. Incheon District Court judgment. Corporate crime specialists at Atlas Legal, Songdo, Incheon, South Korea. atlaw.kr","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/real-estate-fraud-partial-acquittal-in-south-korea-failed-proof-of-deception-case\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"\ud648","item":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Real Estate Fraud Partial Acquittal in South Korea: Failed Proof of Deception Case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","width":540,"height":485,"caption":"Atlas Legal English Blog"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55","name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr"],"url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/author\/prinz001\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=315"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1863,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315\/revisions\/1863"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=315"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=315"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=315"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}