Robbery Lawyer
Robbery Lawyer | Understanding the charge you are facing and building a defense
Robbery under Korean law is not a single offense — it ranges from basic robbery to quasi-robbery (theft followed by violence to avoid arrest or retain the stolen property) and special/aggravated robbery (use of a dangerous weapon or acting in a group), each carrying different minimum sentences (형법 제333조, 제335조, 제334조). Because these are all crimes of violence, prosecutors and courts scrutinize the degree of force used, whether a weapon was genuinely "dangerous," and whether the defendant's intent to take property existed before or after the use of force. A conviction can result in a substantial minimum prison term with no option for a fine, so how the case is framed from the earliest interrogation stage matters a great deal.
Robbery | Robbery, Quasi-Robbery, and Special Robbery: How the Charges Differ
Korean law treats several distinct fact patterns under the umbrella of "robbery." Which one applies changes the mandatory minimum sentence you are facing, so it is worth understanding the boundaries between them early.
This applies when a person takes another's property, or obtains a pecuniary advantage, by using violence or intimidation sufficient to suppress the victim's resistance (형법 제333조). The prosecution must show the force or threat came first, and that it was strong enough to overcome the victim's will — mere snatching without confrontation is usually charged as theft, not robbery. The minimum sentence is 3 years' imprisonment with no upper cap short of life imprisonment.
This covers a thief who, after committing or attempting theft, uses violence or intimidation to escape arrest, recover the stolen goods, or destroy evidence (형법 제335조). Because the violence happens after the taking, whether the acts were closely connected in time and place to the original theft — and whether the defendant's purpose truly matches one of these three categories — is often the central dispute. Quasi-robbery is punished the same as basic robbery.
Robbery committed by breaking into a residence at night, or committed by carrying a dangerous weapon, or committed by two or more people acting jointly, is treated as special robbery with a heavier minimum of at least 5 years' imprisonment (형법 제334조). Whether an object counted as a "dangerous weapon" in the manner it was used, and whether co-defendants shared a common plan rather than acting independently, are frequently contested at trial.
If the victim is injured or killed as a result of the robbery, the charge escalates further to robbery causing injury (강도상해) or robbery resulting in death (강도치사), which carry indefinite-term or life imprisonment ranges (형법 제337조, 제338조). Causation between the robbery act and the injury or death — including injuries the victim sustained while fleeing — is a key point of dispute in these cases.
Attempted Robbery and Voluntary Abandonment
Attempted robbery is separately punishable, and the sentence can be reduced if the attempt was abandoned or interrupted before the property was actually taken (형법 제342조). Whether the defendant stopped voluntarily, or was merely stopped by outside intervention such as the victim fighting back or police arriving, can materially affect sentencing even though both scenarios are charged as attempts.
Robbery | What Actually Gets Litigated in a Robbery Case
Most robbery cases turn on a small number of factual and legal questions rather than on whether property changed hands at all. These are the points where a case is often won or lost.
Sequence of intent: did the taking or the violence come first?
The order in which force and the taking of property occurred is legally decisive. If violence was used first to overcome resistance and property was taken as a result, it is robbery; if property was already taken and violence was used only afterward to escape, it may be quasi-robbery instead — and if there was no plan to take property at all, it may not be robbery at any degree. Defense counsel will often focus on CCTV footage, witness statements, and the timeline in the police report to establish which sequence actually occurred.
Was the object really a "dangerous weapon"?
Courts assess whether an object qualifies as a dangerous weapon under Article 334 not just by what it is, but by how it was carried and used — a kitchen knife brought along for an unrelated reason and never brandished may be treated differently from the same knife pointed at a victim. This distinction can move a case from special robbery's 5-year minimum down to basic robbery's 3-year minimum, which is a meaningful difference at sentencing.
Degree of force required to suppress resistance
Not every act of pushing or grabbing rises to the level of force needed for robbery; the violence or threat must be sufficient to overcome the victim's ability to resist (형법 제333조). Where the level of force is borderline, the defense may argue the correct charge is theft plus a separate assault, rather than a single robbery charge, which changes the applicable sentencing range.
Joint principal liability in group cases
When multiple people are involved, prosecutors often charge everyone as joint principals even if one person's role was minor, such as acting as a lookout. Whether the defendant shared the common intent and plan required for special robbery under Article 334, or was merely present without agreeing to the use of force or a weapon, is a frequent point of dispute that can separate a robbery conviction from a lesser accessory role.
Robbery | From Arrest to Sentencing in a Robbery Case
Robbery is almost always treated as an arrestable offense given its violent nature, so early statements made during police questioning — particularly on the sequence of violence and taking, and any weapon involved — carry significant weight later. Having counsel present or consulted before this stage is critical.
Given the severity of the charge, prosecutors frequently seek a detention warrant; the defense can contest this at a warrant review hearing by addressing flight risk and the strength of the evidence. Whether the defendant remains detained through trial often affects both case preparation and, in practice, sentencing outcomes.
The prosecutor reviews the police file, may conduct additional questioning, and decides whether to indict for basic robbery, quasi-robbery, or special robbery based on the facts established. This is a key stage to submit written opinions or additional evidence that could affect how the charge is framed.
At trial, the court examines witness testimony, CCTV, forensic evidence on any weapon, and the defendant's statements to determine which charge is proven beyond reasonable doubt, and whether any lesser offense fits the facts instead. Cross-examination of the victim and any co-defendants often plays a central role.
If convicted, the court weighs statutory minimums against factors such as the degree of injury, the defendant's criminal record, restitution or settlement with the victim, and genuine remorse, within the sentencing guidelines applicable to violent property crimes.
Robbery | How Legal Fees Are Structured in Robbery Cases
Set according to the severity of the charge (basic robbery, quasi-robbery, or special robbery), the stage of the case (police, prosecution, or trial), and whether the client is currently detained. Cases involving detention warrant defense at the outset are typically priced separately from trial-stage representation.
Where used, this is structured around objective outcomes such as a reduced charge, a suspended sentence, or a more favorable sentencing result rather than any guaranteed result, in line with attorney advertising regulations that prohibit promising a specific outcome.
In robbery cases, reaching a settlement or securing restitution for the victim is often a meaningful mitigating factor at sentencing; any settlement amount is negotiated separately from legal fees and paid directly to the victim or through an agreed channel.
Covers document retrieval, expert opinions on issues such as whether an object qualifies as a dangerous weapon, and travel to detention facilities or courts outside Seoul, billed based on actual cost.
※ Costs vary depending on case complexity and specific circumstances; exact fees will be provided during consultation. No specific outcome is guaranteed.
Robbery | Self-Check for a Robbery Case
1️⃣ Right After Arrest
- Did you make any statement to police before speaking with a lawyer, and what exactly did you say about the sequence of events?
- Was a weapon or object involved, and can you describe exactly how it was carried and used?
- Were other people involved, and can you clearly describe your own role versus theirs?
- Has a detention warrant request been filed, and do you have a fixed address and employment to point to as reasons against detention?
2️⃣ Facing a Quasi-Robbery Charge
- Had the taking of property already been completed before any violence occurred?
- What was your actual purpose in using force — escape, recovering the item, or destroying evidence?
- Is there a clear time and place gap between the original taking and the later use of force?
3️⃣ Facing Special (Aggravated) Robbery
- Was the object you carried actually brandished or used as a weapon, or simply present?
- If multiple people were involved, is there evidence of a prior agreement to use force or a weapon?
- Did the incident occur inside a residence at night, which can independently trigger the aggravated category?
4️⃣ Before Trial
- Has any restitution or settlement discussion with the victim begun?
- Do you have documentation of remorse, such as a written apology or evidence of steps taken to prevent recurrence?
- Have you reviewed the police and prosecution case file with counsel for inconsistencies?
