He explained.

“The case in which Hwang Ui-jo sued as a victim of the spread was already under way by another law firm, and the Hyung-soo’s lawyer was also separately appointed to participate in the investigation and the examination of the warrant,” he said. “However, Hwang Ui-jo and his family members asked the corporation to join the investigation on the sentence temporarily (i.e., on a one-time basis) because they believed that there could be a conflict of interest if Hwang Ui-jo and his family accepted the request of Hwang Ui-jo and his family to defend him, and the corporation did not participate in the investigation.”

In the process above, Daehwan added, “We tried our best to comply with the Lawyers Act by fully explaining the situation to both the investigative agency and the Korean Bar Association in advance and seeking advice on it.”

In addition, he said, “After receiving a telephone reply from the Korean Bar Association to the effect that the above acts (participation in the criminal investigation schedule, etc.) may be a conflict of interest, the prosecution repeatedly stated that it would not participate in future investigations and did not participate in the prosecution,” and emphasized, “The corporation has submitted a selection of prisoners to the investigative agency, but it is clear that it has not helped to terminate the sentence.”

The legal representative also conveyed Hwang Ui-jo’s current situation. “Hwang Ui-jo is self-reflecting with regret for causing disappointment to all of you who have supported him so far,” Daehwan said. “Hwang Ui-jo does not understand that the other woman is expressing her position through the media as one of the officials in this case, but rather than responding to the other woman’s expression of her position, trusting the investigative agency and actively cooperating with the investigative agency’s investigation.” 스포츠토토 사이트 추천