In broad daylight, an intruder broke into a Korean-operated business and stole a card terminal purchased through a major bank, leading to a significant financial loss. The business owner immediately contacted the bank to request the terminal's deactivation. However, the delay in connecting to the relevant department resulted in thousands of dollars being illicitly withdrawn. This incident highlights the need for increased vigilance among Korean small business owners during the year-end period, which often sees a rise in theft crimes.

According to the victim, identified as Mr. B, the incident occurred on Saturday, November 9, between 2:10 PM and 2:15 PM. A South American-looking suspect entered Mr. B’s advertising design office near Buena Park’s Korean Town in Orange County and swiftly stole the card terminal that was connected to its power cord. Mr. B attempted to chase the suspect but had to abandon the pursuit after spotting an accomplice vehicle waiting behind the building with additional suspects inside. He then returned to his office.

Back at the office, Mr. B immediately reported the incident to the police at 2:39 PM. He then contacted Bank of America’s customer service to request deactivation of the stolen terminal and block access to the business checking account linked to it. However, the bank’s customer service agent informed Mr. B that managing card terminals was under a different department’s authority and transferred the call. The automated response of the terminal department indicated it was closed on weekends and public holidays. The customer service agent assured Mr. B that they would deactivate the terminal and block the account, advising him to follow up with the terminal department on Veterans Day, November 12.

During this period, the thieves continued to make withdrawal attempts using the stolen terminal. At 2:38 PM, they tried to withdraw $2,000, which was declined. A minute later, they attempted to withdraw $9,999, which was also declined. However, after two failed attempts, they succeeded in hacking the terminal and withdrawing funds from Mr. B’s account. By the time they were done, approximately $8,000, including the account balance and overdraft, had been illegally withdrawn.

When Mr. B contacted the bank’s card terminal department on November 12, he expressed frustration about the failure to deactivate the terminal. The bank’s response was vague, repeatedly asserting that the loss of the terminal was the business owner’s responsibility. Mr. B countered, “If losing the terminal is my responsibility, isn’t deactivating it the bank’s responsibility? I made the call, requested deactivation, and even recorded the agent’s name. I can’t understand the bank’s response.”

According to Mr. B, the police response was also lackluster. He provided surveillance footage from a neighboring business showing the suspects fleeing, as well as footage from a nearby intersection capturing the getaway vehicle. However, he claimed that the police neither reviewed the evidence nor actively investigated the case. The police reportedly told him that the likelihood of apprehending the perpetrators was very low.

Mr. B stated, “I’m currently in a severe financial crisis, unable even to pay rent. If the bank holds me responsible for the theft and subsequent losses, shouldn’t there have been prior warnings or guidelines about this risk?” He added, “This crime seems to be a relatively new scheme, yet there have been similar cases. The method appears to involve inserting a prepaid card into the terminal, hacking it to deposit funds, and then withdrawing cash through an ATM.”

Reported by Eui-Kyung Hwang

<Hwang, Eui-kyung>