“Kim Soo-hyun Defamation Detention”: Kim Se-ye “Demonization and Stigmatization Are Serious… I Will Protect My 10 Billion Won Apartment” [Comprehensive]

*This content was translated by AI.View Original

• Prosecution Service: “If Kim Se-ye Is Released, They Will Distort It as a ‘Final Acquittal’… Concerns of Reoffending and Secondary Harm to Victims”

Kim Se-ye, president of the media outlet Garoseoro Research Institute (Gaseoyeon), who was indicted on charges of spreading false information about actor Kim Soo-hyun, once again asserted his innocence at the second pretrial hearing.

The Criminal Division 26 of the Seoul Central District Court held the second pretrial hearing on the 15th regarding Kim Se-ui (CEO)’s charges of violating the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation) and other offenses.

On this day, Kim Se-ye appeared in court wearing a prison uniform. He drew attention with his appearance, which showed an increased amount of gray hair. Subsequently, Kim Se-ye answered questions from the court, mentioning his personal information, and then listened to various arguments from his defense attorney.

Kim Se-ye stated, “The prosecutor keeps portraying me as a villain. Due to my detention, I have already been demonized. Someone created an AI-generated interview, fabricating the voice of the late Kim Sae-ron who does not exist, and someone else fabricated KakaoTalk messages that did not actually exist between Kim Soo-hyun and the late Kim Sae-ron, labeling me as such. Defamation against me is being carried out in a very serious manner.” He continued, “I have no risk of destroying evidence. It was initially claimed that I conspired with the bereaved family of the late Kim Sae-ron to commit a crime, but this changed to the claim that I only listened to one-sided assertions from the bereaved family. I do not understand why detention is demanded based solely on listening to one-sided assertions, but I did not broadcast based only on one-sided claims. I analyzed diligently through materials, testimonies, and reporting before broadcasting. I also conducted spectrum analysis and other measures to determine whether AI manipulation was involved.”

He added, “After the exposé broadcast regarding the sexual bribery incident in the Philippines involving Kim Sang-wook, Ulsan mayoral candidate, I was in Vietnam investigating a sexual bribery incident in Vietnam involving Woo Sang-ho, Gangwon provincial governor candidate. Upon hearing that an arrest warrant had been requested, I entered Korea from Vietnam and underwent a substantive review of the warrant.” He emphasized, “Kim Soo-hyun is conducting a civil lawsuit worth 15 billion won against you and the bereaved family of the late Kim Sae-ron. The bereaved family has almost no assets, but they have attached a preliminary injunction to my Hyundai Apartment in Apgujeong, which is worth over 10 billion won. I have no reason to flee because I must protect the precious assets of myself and my family. I am confident that I will face this trial with dignity and definitely receive an acquittal.”

However, the Prosecution Service requested that this be rejected, stating, “Kim Se-ye is currently broadcasting his stance on YouTube by sending letters to relevant parties even while detained. If released, there is a high possibility he will actively continue YouTube broadcasts, posing a significant risk of reoffending and reporting on victims.” They countered, “Looking at the attitude and posture toward this trial, it appears that rather than proceeding diligently, he is merely trying to utilize it for his own broadcasts. If released, it is certain that he will spread distorted facts as if an acquittal has been finalized, causing secondary harm to the victim.”

Kim Se-ye’s attorney discussed evidence-related matters with the court, and the Prosecution Service mentioned a request to amend the indictment. In response, Kim Se-ye’s side stated regarding the amended facts of the prosecution, “We do not agree in general. It is based on the defendant’s request, and we will submit specific details in writing.”

Additionally, the Prosecution Service announced plans to apply for witness testimony from five individuals. This included a mention of applying for testimony from Lee Ro-be, Kim Soo-hyun’s older brother, stating, “This relates to the defamation of the bereaved family of the late Kim Sae-ron, and he is also in the position of representative of the victim’s company (Gold Medalist).” They also stated they would consider Attorney Bu Ji-seok, Kwon Young-chan, and others.

Subsequently, the court continued the preparation hearing and scheduled it for the 28th.

Previously, the court held the first pretrial hearing regarding Kim Se-ui (CEO) in September. Initially, this case was assigned to Criminal Division 14 Single Judge, which is heard by a single judge, but it was reassigned to Criminal Division 26, which is heard by three judges, according to a decision on panel composition. Panel composition is a procedure that changes a case heard by a single judge to one heard by a panel of three judges, considering the nature of the case.

At that time, Kim Se-ye’s attorney stated, “There is no change in our desire for a jury trial,” maintaining their position on applying for a jury trial. However, the court decided not to accept this after concluding the pretrial hearing.

Kim Soo-hyun’s attorney requested the court, “Looking at what (Kim Se-ye) said through broadcasts regarding the reason why the defendant’s side desires a jury trial, he states that ‘we must fight against the massive left-wing power, so a jury trial is necessary.’ The defendant continues to make such claims even while detained. We hope you will examine whether this aligns with the purpose of a jury trial.”

They continued, “The reason why the substantive truth of this case was not initially discovered and the public did not listen to the victim’s (Kim Soo-hyun) rebuttal stems from a social atmosphere where it is impossible to criticize the deceased or their bereaved family. We are concerned whether the defendant’s side is trying to bring the distorted atmosphere from the early stages of the case back into the trial again, or whether they are trying to use it politically.”

The two sides also clashed over the facts of the prosecution. Kim Se-ye’s side argued, “Regarding the defamation portion, the specified facts are not false. The deceased (the late Kim Sae-ron) dated the victim since she was a minor. There exist notes written by the victim before his military enlistment, KakaoTalk messages, and photos and videos taken at the victim’s home. The National Forensic Service merely replied that it is difficult to make a determination regarding deepfake voice with only the provided materials.”

Additionally, Kim Se-ye’s side claimed that they had verified the truthfulness of the materials presented by Kim Se-ye on his YouTube broadcast with the bereaved family, stating, “The deceased’s mother said she was certain that the voice in the recording file belonged to her daughter.”

Regarding the disclosure of photos showing parts of Kim Soo-hyun’s body exposed on a YouTube broadcast, Kim Se-ye’s side countered, “This does not fall under filming materials that may cause sexual shame. It is an everyday photo taken by the deceased at her residence. It is not a photo taken of specific body parts.”

Previously, the Women and Children Crime Investigation Division 2 of the Seoul Central District Prosecution Service indicted Kim Se-ye in detention on charges of violating the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation), violating the Special Act on the Punishment of Sexual Violence Crimes (distribution of filming materials using cameras, etc.), and violating the Act on the Punishment of Stalking Crimes.

Kim Se-ye was suspected of spreading false information through YouTube live broadcasts, press conferences, and other means from March to May 2025, claiming that the late Kim Sae-ron dated Kim Soo-hyun for about six years since she was a minor, and that pressure from Kim Soo-hyun’s side to repay debts became the cause of her death. He is also suspected of defaming Kim Soo-hyun by manipulating the deceased’s voice using AI and fabricating false facts suggesting that the deceased had been dating Kim Soo-hyun since middle school.

The police and Prosecution Service, which investigated the case, stated in the indictment that Kim Se-ye transmitted false information 25 times with the purpose of slandering Kim Soo-hyun. This also included charges of disclosing photos showing Kim Soo-hyun’s body exposed and mentioning the possibility of disclosing additional photos to force Kim Soo-hyun’s side to acknowledge the relationship with the deceased and issue a public apology.

Meanwhile, the Crime Proceeds Recovery Division of the Seoul Central District Prosecution Service completed the registration of provisional seizure for land owned by Kim Se-ye.

Provisional seizure is a measure that temporarily freezes proceeds obtained through illegal acts before a final judgment to prevent suspects from hiding or disposing of them. The amount is known to be a total of 169.4 million won. The Prosecution Service assessed that Kim Se-ye earned at least 54.4 million won in donations and at least 115 million won in advertising revenue. The Prosecution Service explained, “During the police investigation, provisional seizure was applied only to about 5 million won in criminal proceeds, but the Crime Proceeds Recovery Division conducted tracking of all donation accounts of the company operated by Kim Se-ye, key witness investigations of company officials, and asset inquiries.”

Subsequently, the Seoul Central District Court decided to initiate auction proceedings for real estate under Kim Se-ui (CEO)’s name. The received item is one unit of a Hyundai Apartment in Apgujeong-dong, Gangnam-gu. This procedure began with an application by Attorney Kim So-yeon, who claimed that she had not received over 120 million won in attorney fees and other costs from Kim Se-ui (CEO).

Attorney Kim So-yeon had previously applied for compulsory execution based on a payment order from the Daejeon District Court. However, the registry shows prior-ranking claims including a total bank mortgage of about 3.6 billion won, a preliminary injunction on Kim Se-ye’s share set by Gold Medalist, Kim Soo-hyun’s agency, worth 2 billion won, and a tax delinquency seizure by the Gangnam Tax Office of about 2.3 billion won, with the total amount of claims reaching approximately 8070 million won.

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.View Original