Can One Settlement Agreement End a Dispute? [Everyday Life Turned into a Case: Attorney Won Hee-young]

[Financial News]“We’ve settled, so there shouldn’t be any more problems now, right?” Suppose the parties exchange settlement money after a dispute. The person who paid the money breathes a sigh of relief, keeping a signed settlement agreement. But some time later, a request comes in for additional medical expenses. Asked, “Wasn’t that all included in the settlement?” the other party replies, “I never agreed to give up future medical expenses.”

“I will raise no objections, civil or criminal.” If someone signs wording like this intending only to show leniency, it could be interpreted as waiving any remaining claims for damages as well. If treatment is ongoing, the issue is how much of the medical expenses already incurred and those still to come were included in the settlement. If the parties agreed that future medical expenses could be claimed separately, that agreement should also be recorded in the settlement document.
When settling only one of several cases, specify the case number and the subject of the dispute, and state that any other claims are excluded from the settlement. A vague statement waiving “all objections” could lead to disputes over the right to bring claims in other cases as well.
For offenses that cannot be prosecuted over the victim’s objection, such as simple assault, the offender cannot be punished if the victim effectively tells an investigative agency or a court that they do not want the offender punished before the first-instance judgment is handed down. Even in cases such as fraud or embezzlement, which are neither offenses prosecutable over the victim’s objection nor offenses requiring a complaint, settlement with the victim and restitution are important mitigating factors in sentencing. A settlement alone does not end an investigation or trial or guarantee that charges will be dropped or a suspended sentence granted, but it is taken into account favorably when a sentence is determined.

“If you sign the settlement agreement first, I’ll pay you by next month.”
For an offense that cannot be prosecuted over the victim’s objection, an effective statement to an investigative agency or court that the victim does not want the offender punished cannot be withdrawn just because the settlement money was not paid. Nor is it safe to keep the statement and hand over only the settlement agreement first. If the agreement says, “I do not want the offender punished,” the other party can submit it to convey that intent.
If you agree to provide a statement that you do not want the offender punished only after receiving the full amount, the payment agreement should specify the amount and payment date, as well as state, “The statement that I do not want the offender punished will be provided after I receive the full settlement amount.” Do not include wording saying that you do not want the offender punished at present, or claiming that you have received the full amount when you have not.
For installment payments, specify each payment date and amount, and include a condition allowing the unpaid balance to be claimed all at once in the event of late payment. If you agree to provide the statement that you do not want the offender punished first, the agreement to pay the remaining settlement amount can be drawn up as a notarized deed containing the debtor’s consent to compulsory execution. This allows compulsory execution without a separate lawsuit if the money is not paid, but recovery will be difficult if there are no assets to enforce against.

In a case handled by the author, someone who had received several hundred million won in settlement money filed a criminal complaint just before the statute of limitations expired. The person who had paid the money became a suspect in a case they thought was over and was investigated.
If an agreement not to bring a civil lawsuit is valid, a lawsuit in breach of it is not permitted. But an agreement not to file a criminal complaint does not extinguish the right to file one. In cases that are neither offenses requiring a complaint nor offenses prosecutable over the victim’s objection, the victim can file a criminal complaint even after a settlement, as long as the statute of limitations has not expired.
Suppose the parties settled for 100 million won over a crime with a 10-year statute of limitations, but the other party used the money for more than nine years before filing a criminal complaint just before the limitations period expired. If the only consequence for breaking the promise is repayment of the principal, the other party still benefits from having used the money during that time.
The author therefore recommends including a contractual penalty clause in an agreement not to sue or an agreement not to file a criminal complaint. A contractual penalty is a sum paid as a sanction for breaking a promise. Specify the breach and the amount, and make clear that the penalty is payable separately from repayment of the settlement money or compensation for damages. The party receiving the settlement money can also add a contractual penalty to an agreement prohibiting contact or approach.
A contractual penalty does not eliminate the possibility of a criminal complaint. The victim might still file one, thinking they can pay the penalty and, if there is a separate repayment agreement, return the settlement money as well. An agreement that improperly suppresses the right to file a complaint, or an excessively onerous contractual penalty, may be invalid.
Even so, the author believes it is better to reach a settlement. If someone agrees to end a dispute after receiving settlement money and then files a criminal complaint, investigative agencies or a court may examine the circumstances behind the reversal and the motive for filing. If the person demanded additional money without any significant change in circumstances, they may be suspected of using the complaint as a means of pressure. The person complained against can submit the settlement agreement and payment records as evidence in their defense, and the fact that the victim was actually compensated is also considered in sentencing.

AI can also draft a settlement agreement. But if the other party first asks for an apology, simply offering a higher amount is unlikely to secure a settlement. A lawyer explains the likely outcome and liability for damages if no settlement is reached, and works with the client to decide what terms they can concede.
The parties may agree, but a family member who is expected to provide the money may object; people sharing liability may also dispute how the burden should be divided. In such cases, even after the parties agree on the amount, negotiations continue over who will pay how much.
If you wait until you have already agreed on the amount and terms before asking someone to review the settlement agreement, the other party may refuse to amend it even if you find an unfavorable clause. The more stakeholders a case involves and the more deeply emotions are entangled, the better it is to work out a negotiating strategy with a lawyer before proposing the initial terms.
[About the Author]Attorney Won Hee-young, a former reporter for Financial News, currently handles criminal cases at YK Law Firm. Won Hee-young graduated from Ewha Womans University, earned a master’s degree in media and communication from Seoul National University’s graduate school, and graduated from Ewha Womans University’s School of Law. Won Hee-young examines the moments when ordinary life leads to legal disputes and explains the key issues that shape case outcomes, along with practical ways to respond.
[email protected] Lee Hwan-joo Reporter