Father Appears After 10 Years and Takes Tens of Millions in Settlement Money Instead of Son [Seocho-dong Legal Story]

Ex-Con Biological Father Appears After 10 Years
Meets Perpetrator Side in Son's Victim Case
Receives Settlement Money Instead, Files Non-Prosecution Request in Son's Name
"Son Pleads for Severe Punishment"... 1st Trial Sentences Biological Father to 2 Years Imprisonment

This is the story of a biological father who betrayed his son, who nearly lost his life in an assault incident. Around 5 a.m. on February 18, 2018, Mr. A (then 25 years old) was beaten and collapsed after a dispute with Mr. B on the street. Even after Mr. A lost consciousness, Mr. B repeatedly stomped on his face, resulting in multiple fractures that required Mr. A to be hospitalized for six weeks. The medical expenses alone amounted to tens of millions of won. Mr. B was prosecuted for assault, and the first trial sentenced him to 1 year and 6 months in prison, stating, "The assault could have endangered the victim's life." Mr. B’s side appealed and attempted to reach a settlement with Mr. A.

However, Mr. A’s biological father got involved. Having had no contact for over ten years, he approached his son after being released from prison in January 2018. The father met directly with Mr. B’s side and received a settlement amount of 20 million won. From Mr. A’s perspective, this was an amount he had no intention of agreeing to. The father then drafted a letter of withdrawal of charges against Mr. B in Mr. A’s name and even gave false testimony in Mr. B’s trial, claiming, "My son received 12 million won from the settlement." Upon discovering that an unfair settlement had been made, Mr. A filed a complaint against his father with the police and sent him a lengthy message expressing his resentment. Ultimately, the appellate court also dismissed Mr. B’s appeal, stating, "There is suspicion that the father took over Mr. A’s authority to settle."

The father-son relationship rapidly deteriorated. The prosecution indicted the father on charges of fraud, forgery of private documents, and perjury. The father countersued his son for false accusation, but Mr. A was cleared of all charges. During his trial, the father cited Article 224 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which prohibits children from suing their parents for forgery of private documents and other offenses, arguing that "a child cannot sue a parent, making the prosecutor’s indictment invalid." He further claimed, "As a father, I have the authority to settle on behalf of my son. The prosecutor’s investigation and indictment of this family matter is based on personal prejudice. The issue was resolved when the settlement money was returned to Mr. B’s side." On the other hand, Mr. A appealed, stating, "My father told me to get a certificate of seal impression by offering a used car he received from a friend," and claimed that his certificate of seal impression was misused during the settlement process with Mr. B’s side.

The father was sentenced to prison again. According to the legal community on the 18th, the Criminal Division 21-1 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Heo Kyung-moo), which presided over the father’s first trial, recently sentenced him to 2 years in prison. The court stated, "The son’s complaint was merely a clue for investigation. The victim can prompt the exercise of investigative authority through complaints, reports, or tips. As a prosecutor who observed Mr. B’s appeal trial, it was possible to recognize the father’s charges. Although Mr. B’s side expressed a desire not to punish the father, the prosecutor’s indictment is valid since they are not relatives."

The court added, "The father committed this crime about six months after being released from prison for a similar offense. Instead of showing remorse, he shifted responsibility to his son, whose identity was stolen, and even sued his son." The court continued, "The father’s conduct is of very poor quality, as he exploited his son’s legal ignorance to appear helpful while seeking personal gain. Considering the significant mental shock suffered by the son, who petitioned for severe punishment against his father, a heavy sentence is inevitable." The father appealed the first trial’s verdict.