[Exclusive] Isum Investment CEO Accuses Victim's Lawyer of Demanding Money Under Pretext of Facilitating Settlement

Song Chang-su, CEO of Isum Investment Advisory, Accused of Violating Attorney Act; Victim's Lawyer Files Complaint
"Said 'Wouldn't it be good to win-win,' then paid 100 million won," Claim
Victim's Lawyer Denies Receiving Money, Considering Defamation Lawsuit

Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, Seocho-gu, Seoul. / Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] A lawyer who represented the victims in the '130 billion KRW Isum investment fraud' case has been reported to the prosecution on charges of demanding and receiving money from Song Changsoo, CEO of Isum Investment Advisory, under the pretense of "cooperating in reaching a settlement with the victims."

On the 7th, according to a compilation of Asia Economy's coverage, Beom Seungguk, a lawyer at Gangnam Law Firm and legal representative for Song, filed a complaint with the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office the day before against Lawyer B of Law Firm A, who was the representative for the victims' association in the 'Isum Investment Advisory fraud' case, on charges of violating the Attorney Act (prohibition of abuse of official authority).

The 'Isum Investment Advisory fraud' involved Song deceiving a total of 2,993 victims in 2015 by promising "to guarantee the principal after three months through overseas futures investment and to guarantee an investment return of about 2.5% monthly," thereby embezzling a total of approximately 140 billion KRW. Song was sentenced to 13 years in prison by the Supreme Court for this fraud and is currently incarcerated.

According to the complaint filed by Song's side, Lawyer B approached Song, whose 13-year prison sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2017, and demanded compensation by stating, "I will actively cooperate in the process of reaching a settlement with the victims' association as their representative," and received ten 10-million KRW cashier's checks, totaling 100 million KRW. Song's side claimed in the complaint that Lawyer B proposed, "If you reach a settlement with the victims' association in the future, it will be advantageous for sentence reduction or parole. I will help you, so please show sincerity. Wouldn't it be good if we both win-win?"

Article 33 of the current Attorney Act stipulates that "a lawyer shall not receive or demand or promise benefits from the opposing party regarding a case they are handling." Song's side stated, "Initially, Lawyer B demanded the entire amount in cash, but Song deliberately gave some in checks for future purposes," and added, "We submitted a confirmation letter stamped with Lawyer B's seal and photos of the checks issued at that time as evidence to the prosecution."

In response, Lawyer B denied the allegations stated in the complaint as groundless and expressed intentions to consider filing a defamation suit against Song's side. Lawyer B said, "Recently, there was a report on a terrestrial broadcast news about Song's hidden assets. Since Law Firm A gave related interviews, Song's side has been applying various pressures (such as submitting complaints). I have never received any checks from Song's side. The prosecution can verify this by tracking the checks."