"70-Year-Old Sentenced to Prison for Embezzling Hundreds of Millions from Acquaintance Despite Having a 1 Trillion Won Check from DJ"

A man in his 70s, who was prosecuted on charges of embezzling hundreds of millions of won from an acquaintance by claiming he served as the chairman of the Finance Committee during the Kim Dae-jung administration, was sentenced to imprisonment.

[Asia Economy Reporter Oh Gyumin] A man in his 70s who was prosecuted for embezzling several hundred million won from an acquaintance by claiming he served as the Chairman of the Finance Committee during the Kim Dae-jung administration was sentenced to imprisonment.

The Seoul Western District Court Criminal Division 1 (Presiding Judge Kang Seongsu) announced on the 12th that it sentenced Mr. A (77), who was indicted on charges of fraud and forgery of negotiable instruments, to one year in prison on the 9th.

Mr. A is accused of receiving a transfer of 100 million won from the victim at the victim’s office located in Songpa-gu, Seoul, around February 5, 2020, by claiming, “I borrowed 500 million won secured by a 1 trillion won check granted by President Kim Dae-jung,” and “If you lend me 100 million won, I can retrieve the check and cash it, then give you the borrowed 100 million won plus an incentive equivalent to 10% of the profit obtained from cashing it.”

On the same day, Mr. A is also accused of handing over a cashier’s check with a face value of 1 trillion won to the victim, knowing it was forged, and asking to have it cashed.

According to the court, Mr. A showed the victim photos taken with President Kim Dae-jung, whom he met through an acquaintance around November 2019, and falsely claimed that he served as the Chairman of the Finance Committee during the Kim Dae-jung administration and that they had a special relationship because he supported Kim extensively during his exile in the United States.

During the trial, Mr. A claimed, “I never told the victim what is stated in the indictment, and I received 100 million won only because the victim believed the check was genuine without me knowing it was forged.”

However, the court considered ▲ the victim’s consistent testimony and ▲ Mr. A’s apology to the victim after the crime, and concluded that Mr. A’s false statements as described in the indictment could be acknowledged. The court also judged that Mr. A had at least conditional intent regarding the forgery of the check.

The court pointed out, “Mr. A used a forged check to deceive the victim with completely false statements and embezzled 100 million won,” and “The damage has not been restored, and Mr. A has not been forgiven by the victim.”

However, the court explained the sentencing by stating, “It does not appear that Mr. A had definite intent regarding the forgery of the check.”

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