beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2014.11.21 2014노1156

변호사법위반

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is not the acquisition of the claim of this case by D, but the collection is delegated in return for the use of the claim of this case in lieu of the claim of this case. Thus, a person, other than an attorney-at-law, who has dealt with legal affairs

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. On September 2013, the Defendant, who works for a real estate development company, was requested to collect and use the claim amounting to KRW 10 million in the vicinity of Gangdong-gu Seoul, where the Defendant works for the real estate development company, and received a claim transfer and takeover contract accordingly.

Considering that selling apartment to E constitutes a fraudulent act, the Defendant: (a) deemed that selling apartment to E constitutes a fraudulent act, and, at the guard room of the apartment that F is living, entrusted with a complaint for revocation of the fraudulent act; and (b) sent it to F.

In addition, on December 30, 2013, the Defendant issued KRW 11 million from E under the pretext of the agreement for debt collection, to E, in which the complaint was brought to this F and who received F contact, prior to filing a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act.

As a result, the defendant agreed to receive money and valuables from a person who is not an attorney-at-law and dealt with representation, reconciliation, legal counseling and other legal affairs concerning general legal cases.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) according to the records, the following facts are as follows: (b) D made efforts to recover claims, such as one person’s demonstration at E office from 2007 to recover claims against E; (c) D refused voluntary repayment, such as filing a petition for bankruptcy; (d) D’s failure to accept a claim against the remaining Defendant who suffered from severe stress; and (e) D’s failure to reduce the amount of fees instead of receiving claims from E; and (c) the Defendant drafted a contract for the transfer and takeover of claims (see, e.g., investigation records from 73 to 79, and 94); and (c) Meanwhile, the Defendant.