Attorney Charged With Fraud and Money Laundering Over Real Estate Deals

Money laundering

LOS ANGELES – An attorney who allegedly took several million dollars in investment capital from clients and used the funds for personal expenses and luxury items was indicted today by a federal grand jury.

Stephen Young Kang, 46, of Newport Beach, was named in a 25-count indictment filed in United States District Court in Los Angeles. The indictment charges Kang with 20 counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering.

The indictment comes after Kang was arrested by special agents with the FBI and IRS – Criminal Investigation on August 10 at Los Angeles International Airport as he attempted to board a flight to Seoul, Korea. Kang is currently free on a $750,000 secured bond.

According to the indictment, Kang defrauded a Gardena-based food distribution company, Ottogi America, Inc., whose representatives hired the attorney to help the company purchase additional properties near its distribution center. Between October 2012 and March 2014, Ottogi wire transferred approximately $3.7 million to a trust account in Houston, Texas, to be used for the purchase of the properties. But Kang allegedly did not use the money to invest in properties. Rather, Kang allegedly caused the vast majority of the funds to be transferred to other accounts that he controlled, and then used a substantial portion of Ottogi’s money to pay for personal expenses and business ventures, as well as to make partial payment to other victims.

Kang is also alleged to have defrauded other victims. According to the indictment, Kang agreed to provide legal and investment services to a married couple who wanted to invest money that would help them obtain EB-5 visas, which requires the applicant to invest at least $500,000 in a commercial enterprise that creates or preserves at least 10 permanent, full-time jobs. The indictment alleges that these victims wired more than $1 million to Kang in 2011, but Kang failed to invest the money as promised. Instead, Kang used the funds for personal and business expenses, as well as to pay other individuals who previously invested money with him. When the victims demanded the return of their investment, Kang allegedly concealed the fraud by using money he received from other clients, including Ottogi, to repay a portion of their investment.

Kang is scheduled to be arraigned on the indictment on September 8.
If convicted of the charges in the indictment, Kang faces a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison for each of the wire fraud charges and up to 10 years in prison for each of the money laundering offenses.

An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty in court.

Based on the evidence in this case, investigators believe Kang may have victimized others in locations where he practiced law or resided, including California, Texas, and Seoul, Korea. Anyone who believes they may have been victimized by Kang should contact the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office at (310) 477-6565.

The case against Kang is the product of an ongoing investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and IRS – Criminal Investigation.


“New Law” Beats Big Law Says Harvard Law

Work life1

“New Law” is generally better than Big Law, according to a new report from the Harvard Business Review.

“Better” means more work-life balance in the case of the entrepreneurial legal ventures that provide innovative new ways to practice law, such as Axiom, which already has half of the Fortune 100 as its clients, and Counsel on Call, which has one third of the business group and employs over 900 lawyers.

Professor Joan Williams
Professor Joan Williams

The HBR article, written by University of California at Hastings professor Joan Williams, finds there are 5 key New Law models that appear to be winning the day with lawyers in terms of their work choices and their out-of-work choices, too. 

The five models include:

1.  Secondment, where lawyers work on site with clients

2. Companies combing both legal and business advisory services.

3. Companies called “Accordion companies” that can provide lawyers to law firms needing to beef up their legal armory

4.  Virtual law firms that permit lawyers to work from home, and

5.  Firms operating on innovative law firm fee structure models.

 

Professor Hastings writes:

Big Law’s commanding market lead in specific practices areas is also being challenged by boutique firms. A notable example is Bartlit Beck Palenchar & Scott, which handles high-profile trial work; it led the British Petroleum National Oil Spill Commission for the Obama administration. Other examples include Landmark Law Group (real estate), Smithline PC (tech transactions and IP licensing), Miller Law Group (defense-side employment law), Valorem Law Group (complex litigation), and The California Appellate Group (appellate).

Relatively routine legal work of the sort that used to keep first- and second-year associates busy at large law firms is also migrating away. The behemoth of “legal process outsourcing” is Axiom, which has commodified large companies’ contracting and certain litigation functions. Counsel on Call does e-discovery, contract review and abstraction, and other managed services, Raymond Law Group specializes in “price-sensitive commodity (litigation) work”). For a fixed fee, The General Counsel, Ltd will handle all of a company’s employment law matters.

Secondment Firms handle overflow from in-house legal departments and part time in-house counsel work for companies too small to need a full time General Counsel. The first step was that a lot of legal work formerly done by outside counsel migrated to in-house corporate legal departments. Now even the overflow work from in-house departments has migrated away from Big Law, too.

Last but not least, some New Law firms target the small or mid-market companies that may have been priced out by the steep rise in Big Law rates. Examples are The Mitzel Group LLP, Phillips & Reiter, PLLC, InnovaCounsel, LLP, Avökka, The General Counsel, Limited, Exemplar Companies, Inc., Burton Law LLC.) (Some of these target large companies as well.)

All this adds up to a sobering picture that helps explain why Big Law’s book of business is no longer growing by leaps and bounds. “While the … revenue that is actually being siphoned off by these non-traditional service providers still seems modest compared to the overall size of the legal market,” noted influential legal commentator James Jones, “they’re growing and they’re growing every single year.” Big Law used to do the entire spectrum of legal work, from low- to high-complexity. Now “the unbundling taking place in the corporate legal market” means that the “’fat middle’ of ‘meat and potatoes’ legal work” is being siphoned off, much of it to New Law. It’s classic disruption.

So here’s the real story. Big Law attorneys are notably unhappier than most other lawyers, for a variety of reasons. Far and away the most common one given by the Big Law refugees who have founded New Law companies is the desire for work-life balance.

Recent research suggests that what Big Law offers—one-off individual accommodation policies—are not effective. Typically, the people who use them suffer the worst of both worlds – they’re stigmatized, but find themselves working full time for part-time pay. What New Law offers is what leading researchers now agree is a more promising formula: they hard-bake work-life balance into the business model.

Source: Harvard Law Review

About The Author