Supreme Court Confirms 4-Year Prison Sentence for Entertainment Agency CEO Involved in Lime Fund Ponzi Scheme

Supreme Court in Seocho-dong, Seoul. Photo by Mun Ho-nam munonam@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The CEO of an entertainment agency, who was prosecuted for causing losses to the company by participating in Lime Asset Management's fund rolling scheme, has had his prison sentence confirmed by the Supreme Court.

On the 22nd, the Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Park Jeonghwa) upheld the original sentence of 4 years imprisonment for Mr. A, the CEO of the entertainment agency, who was indicted on charges including breach of trust and embezzlement under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes.

Earlier, Mr. A was prosecuted for causing losses to company B, an entertainment agency he represented, by investing approximately 20 billion KRW received from Lime into convertible bonds of Hallyu Times, which was facing delisting. He was accused of participating in the 'fund rolling' scheme to conceal the fund's insolvency, at the request of Mr. C, chairman of Hallyu Times, and involving Vice President Lee Jongpil of Lime, who managed the fund.

Mr. A was also indicted for embezzling a total of about 8.9 billion KRW from company B and Hallyu Times.

The first trial court sentenced him to 3 years imprisonment, ruling all charges against Mr. A as guilty, stating, "Due to Mr. A's crimes, company B went out of business, and Hallyu Times' shareholders and stakeholders suffered enormous damages."

The second trial court acquitted him of the charge of concealing criminal proceeds but increased the sentence to 4 years imprisonment. The court at the time stated, "The damage was directly passed on to numerous unspecified fund investors, causing many victims," and pointed out, "The defendant's role and culpability in this planned and organized crime cannot be lightly evaluated."

The Supreme Court also agreed with this judgment. The court stated, "The lower court did not err in its legal interpretation regarding the acquisition of criminal proceeds and the concealment of their origin," and dismissed the prosecutor's appeal.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.