Partial success for Dr. Markus Braun in the dispute over asset seizure
In the course of the highly publicized Wirecard scandal, the former CEO of Wirecard AG, Dr. Markus Braun, remains at the center of criminal and civil investigations. As part of the ongoing process, the Munich Regional Court I has made a key decision regarding the prosecution’s access to Dr. Braun’s assets. The case highlights the complex legal framework that accompanies state access to asset positions during investigative proceedings.
Asset seizure in white-collar criminal law
In white-collar criminal law, asset seizure—especially pursuant to § 111e StPO—plays a central role when there is suspicion of criminal conduct. The aim is to proactively prevent potential asset shifts that could hinder subsequent recovery. However, the imposition of such a seizure requires sufficient suspicion based on substantial evidence and legitimate indications that asset recovery may be thwarted.
Key points of the court’s decision
In the present case, the prosecution secured substantial assets of Dr. Braun by way of interim legal protection. Braun contested this and filed a legal challenge. In its decision (Case No.: 5 HK O 17659/21, decision dated 14.06.2022), the Regional Court of Munich I examined in particular the extent to which the seizure could actually encompass all allegedly affected assets and whether the statutory requirements were fully met.
Review criteria and requirements
The court was tasked with carefully examining whether and to what extent a criminal law seizure was actually justified. It particularly investigated whether the affected assets demonstrably originated from potentially criminal acts or were involved in those offences. This requires the investigating authorities to provide comprehensible explanations regarding the origin and status of the seized assets.
Result of the court’s review
The court concluded—contrary to what is often practiced in similar scenarios—that part of the assets seized by the prosecution from Dr. Braun did not clearly meet the requirements of §§ 73ff StGB (confiscation of criminal proceeds). Consequently, the seizure was lifted in relation to certain assets. Other asset positions remain subject to state control according to the current ruling. It therefore represents a partial success for Dr. Braun in his efforts to preserve his assets.
Significance of the decision and outlook
Although the proceedings against Dr. Braun are ongoing and all allegations remain subject to the presumption of innocence, the decision of the Munich Regional Court I underlines the demands that must be met by state security measures in complex economic crime cases. Judicial oversight ensures that state interventions in proprietary rights adhere to the principle of proportionality and protect the rights of those affected.
The proceedings also make clear how multifaceted the legal questions are regarding state-ordered asset protection, given the interplay between the Code of Criminal Procedure and economic ownership structures. The final assessment of whether and to what extent assets can be permanently confiscated is reserved for the further course of the main criminal proceedings.
Notice regarding ongoing proceedings and sources
The presumption of innocence continues to apply to Dr. Braun. This summary is based on the publicly available decision of the Regional Court of Munich I (Case No.: 5 HK O 17659/21, published among others on urteile.news, accessed on 14.06.2022) as well as on the currently known facts of the ongoing proceedings.
If you have individual legal questions regarding the securing, release, or defense of assets in connection with investigative or criminal proceedings, the lawyers at MTR Legal are available to assist you with their extensive experience.
