O-Ring

Not sure which incident you are referring to, but in episode 16, they said that there was no black-box/dashcam in the cars of Oh Jong-tae and Yoo Jung-seok. Which is sort of logical as they were both planning to do some shady stuff. Why would you record the encounter, which can be used against you later on?

I do not know why Jang Jin-soo was reckless, do you mind explaining it to me?

Yes, we did... It was after the scene in the dungeon in episode 7.

He goes to the temple and asks for CJW. The wife of Soon-kil says: "Why are you looking for her?" He responds: "We were supposed to meet here". Then CJW calls the restaurant owner from her car and says: "Sir, my husband suddenly fell ill. So I am on my way back to Seoul". He then answers: "My goodness, I hope he is okay".

But I see a lot of comments that the Chinese restaurant owner suddenly showed up at the temple, so I am thinking that the VIU/Viki-version might be different than the one that was broadcast on TVN. The scene must have been cut by VIU or Viki...

He went to the temple, because that is where CJW and he decided to meet up, but CJW bailed last-minute because her husband fell ill...

Everything you said is spot on, but stories such as Stranger are just too complex to pull in big viewership ratings. One of the most heard complaint about Stranger 1 and 2 is that the story is difficult to understand... Even if Season 2 is completely in the same style as Season 1, the viewership will be roughly the same.

Thanks for the correction btw. I have checked and you are indeed right. Stranger Season 1 was at the same slot as Season 2, so now Ockanna's response does not make sense at all...

I was responding to Maira10, who used the ratings decline to prove a point... I only argued that if ratings were an indication of quality, they outperformed themselves already in comparison to season 1. So I was not the first to bring this point up, but Maira10...

But to be fair, you did not really correct me. Because I showed you that it is still doable to score 6-8% on Monday-Tuesday. Case in point: "The Good Detective". Even with the same concept.

It does not really matter, because I am pretty sure that TVN put quality over the ratings for Stranger 2. That is why they pre-produced everything.

So? How are the ratings of "The Good Detective" on Monday-Tuesday? Similar to "Stranger 2"...

"The Good Detective" is similar in genre and plot and still achieves 6-7%. A rating above 4-5% is still doable, even for a Monday-Tuesday drama...

Even so, I am trying to say that season 1 was not a rating machine. Everyone knows that, but it was praised for its quality. Thus, ratings should not be used as an argument to prove a point, because Stranger was never driven by it.

Well, ratings were definitely never the driving force behind Stranger. In fact, if the ratings are an indication of quality, then the writer and director absolutely made the right choice. Whilst Season 1 was hovering between 4 and 4.3% for the majority, Season 2 is hovering between 6 and 7%.

I am not saying that DHS is a good person though. It is more that the Korean general public will not accept character with a rape-background. So the writer will not really put in these controversial topics - unless he/she thinks it will benefit the story

I think the start of Season 2 is better than the start of Season 1... The editing is also better.

I do agree that there is less of Si-mok, however Dong-jae is getting more spotlight. Which I do not mind actually, because DJ is hella funny...

Right, but what did that hotel recording of Oh Jong-tae try to prove again? You know the CCTV-recording that Oh Ji-hyuk discovered to be a fake, because of the fly? Wasn't it to direct the attention to OJT in court? Was OJT somewhere in the process not acquitted?

This show has quite the information overload that it becomes difficult to re-call the story in my mind accurately and completely... Haha...

Try wikipedia. It has short summaries per episode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stranger_(TV_series)#Episodes

Yeah, don't know where people get this creativity from. If he was really raping people, this show would be cancelled very quickly... Because it adds nothing to the story and it is quite controversial to have a protagonist with that kind of background. Furthermore, DHS would not be so apologetic by saying that he should not have used the tape to blackmail KMJ

Haha, no worries. I like to ramble as well.

I think you are right about the lawyers informing him, but Oh Ji-hyuk also said that Oh Jong-tae "felt that his privileged background was a skill". Thus, I think Ji-hyuk knows that his cousin might be careless, because he thinks that his lawyers/connections might bail him out.

On the other hand, if I think about it, it might actually not be a mistake of the writer. But since my memory is hazy, perhaps you can help me with it. What was the goal of the process of Lee Dae-chul? Was it to prove that he was not guilty? Was it to re-open the case, so they could find the real culprit? If the latter was the goal of the case, then we can say that case is officially closed. After all, they concluded that there was not enough reason to re-open the case.

Or Oh Ji-hyuk might be pranking his cousin again... Tricking him into a confession and then surprising him with a trial? Would be a bit dirty, but who knows... Kang Do-chang is definitely capable of "lying" as he also committed perjury in court by saying that HE lost the weapon to protect Lee Dae-chul... Perhaps OJH also has this "dirty" side?

But to be fair, I think we might have also missed some important details. This show has a funny poster, but contains quite a lot of information. Because it is so layered, it would also not be weird that the writer made a mistake...

The real BHS is a couple of years older than DHS. DHS is the same age as KMJ. KMJ is younger than CJW. However, BHS is older than CJW.

BHS was celebrating his 39th birthday (check the birthday cake) in episode 1. Assuming that is Korean age, he is 38 years now. I think the funeral happened 18 years ago, so he was 20.

I think you are on to something. I can't remember whether OJT was actually acquitted or not. My mind automatically assumed he did, but I think you are right that the process was about Lee Dae-chul. OJT might never been acquitted. If that is the case, then OJT was never put in jeopardy in the first place and therefore is not protected by the double jeopardy clause.

It looks like a "6" to me as well. However, with a bit of imagination I can also see a "5". I think they made it look intentionally like a "6", but it might actually be a "5". Having said that, after 011.876, there is another number written on her hand, but that looks like a "9" or something and not a "2".

Anyone care to decipher what numbers the accomplice wrote on Im Na-young's arm at the funeral? It looks like 011.876, but the "6" is written weirdly and I think it might be a "5". This could be the same number as Baek Man-woo tried to call (011.875.2332) on his flip-phone. By the way, I do not think it is a burner phone, but rather the real phone of Baek Hee-sung, because it looks similar to the phone he used when he was driving and hit DHS

There is also a special meaning behind the blue gummies. When she was eating the blue gummies, Ji-woo (the autistic girl) told Soon-ho (the lawyer) that the "blue gummies were the only ones you can trust". Most likely, because the other colors are sour. By giving the blue gummies to Ji-woo, Soon-ho was basically saying that Ji-woo is someone he trusts fully.

I think this is what people in law call "ne bis in idem"/"double jeopardy". It is a legal doctrine that "no legal action can be instituted twice for the same cause of action". In other words, you cannot be punished twice for the same crime. The reason for this is that that it prevents the legal system from "bullying"/"pestering" people. Since he was acquitted, he cannot be tried for the same crime. I think sometimes they allow for a retrial, but there are specific conditions to make it work. You need to check jurisprudence for it. From the top of my head, I think "mistrial" and "fraud" is a valid reason for retrial. A confession is not a valid reason for retrial. But there was definitely some fraud going on, so who knows...

Although it is difficult to punish him in criminal court, he can still be sued in civil court by the wronged party. So you can hold him financial liable for the damages he inflicted when he confesses.