Sunny Day

Some updates:
1. On Monday, the Gangnam Police announced that they will soon complete the investigation, having also received the results of the forensic examination of the voice recording.
2. Although the source is unknown, media reports have stated that the forensic examination results are inconclusive because the original recording was not submitted.

Garo0 has announced that he possesses the original recording and will release it in full.
We cannot afford to wait. The only evidence on which the deceased’s family based their complaint against Kim Soo-hyun is the audio recording. If this recording is deemed inconclusive, it will be excluded from the case file and will have no impact on the outcome of the investigation—exactly as already occurred in the case initiated following Kim Soo-hyun’s own complaint.
For Kim Soo-hyun, this situation is not decisive, as his complaints concern other matters, and the exclusion of this single recording does not negate the acts allegedly committed by Kim Se-ui. But for KSR's family that was the only evidence!
However, if Kim Se-ui continues to claim that he possesses the original recording and intends to release it, there is nothing preventing him from submitting the original to the case file opened based on the family’s complaint. Or have they already withdrawn their complaint because they know the voice recording is fake and manipulated with AI?
If he fails to submit it, this will be further proof that he is merely bluffing rather than genuinely seeking justice for the deceased.
Therefore, we call on everyone who truly wants justice for Kim Sae-ron: request that Garo0 submit the original voice recording to the authorities.
We support you.

A careful investigation can uncover many clues ... There’s a saying: the fence may look freshly painted on the outside, but a leopard is hiding inside. That’s what the real culprit is like. I think many people know the truth, yet the only one being blamed is KSH. Because he is an easy target.

I hope that too. Their manipulation technique is so obvious.

Everyone is waiting for the results. However, regardless of when they come out, the decision will not be final.
The police will complete their investigation and issue a recommendation—either to indict or not to indict—and then forward the case to the prosecutor. The prosecutor will review the file to determine whether the investigation was thorough, lawful, and complete.
If the prosecutor finds that the investigation was inadequate or that certain aspects were not examined, the case can be sent back to the police for further investigation. If the prosecutor concludes that the investigation was properly conducted and fully completed, they may uphold the police’s conclusion and officially notify the parties.
Any party dissatisfied with the prosecutor’s decision may file an objection. The chief prosecutor (or a higher-ranking supervising prosecutor) will review the objection, and will give a decision.That decision can still be appealed in court. (There is also the possibility that the objection will be upheld, in which case the file may be returned to the police for additional investigation.)
The court, in turn, may either return the case for further investigation or uphold the prosecutor’s decision.
So there is still a long way to go. It is too early to feel exhausted—I am sorry to say this. Everyone must stay strong until the end. But it is likely that only the Gangnam Police might delay the process. I am confident that the prosecution and the court will proceed more quickly. It will be a good ending though .
Let’s not forget: “What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger.”
( Friedrich Nietzsche)

In recent days, various statements and presentations of alleged “new evidence” have circulated, issued by the lawyer representing the deceased’s family.
Why are these materials, including the so-called extract from the forensic report, legally irrelevant?
1. The addressee of the memorandum and letter is unknown, and neither document mentions Kim Soo Hyun by name. Any interpretation is therefore speculative. At that time,s he was affiliated with YG and had colleagues who entered military service concurrently(guess), so these documents cannot constitute evidence in themselves.
2. The cats’ names appear to be part of a comedic reference. Even if the family attempts to connect them to the drama The Moon Embracing the Sun, they could just as easily be linked to Moonlight Drawn by Clouds, which would arguably be a closer fit. It is also noted that some former YG colleagues of the deceased have publicly posted images and promoted outfits emphasizing moon-and-cloud motifs; several of those individuals appear to bear tattoos with similar motifs. So, the reference to cats name is entirely inconclusive.
3. The so-called “forensic report,” which now appears in a modified version compared to earlier presentation of the kakao talk messages, is merely a document devoid of evidentiary or legal value. Proper forensic reporting requires strict adherence to procedural and legal standards, including transparency, preservation of digital evidence, and compliance with personal data protection laws such as the PIPA. Additionally, guidelines from authorities such as the KFTC require accurate reporting—both technical and non-technical—verification of tools used, and proper safeguarding of personal data.
Furthermore, a partial forensic report from an active investigation cannot be disclosed. Any disclosure requires authorization from competent authorities, such as public prosecutors or judicial police officers (NPA or PO). This alone demonstrates that the table presented by the family does not originate from the investigative file but rather from the family's own “forensick :) specialists.”

It is evident that both the family and Garo0 have consistently introduced materials that fail to meet even minimal evidentiary standards. Aware of the weakness of their position in the legal proceedings, they now rely on shaping public perception through misrepresentations and selective disclosures. Their objective is to create the false impression that the investigation was flawed, rather than to present verifiable facts. Behind them stands the individual who in fact maintained a relationship with the deceased when she was still a minor. The day will surely come when this aspect is brought to light.

They are trying to blame Kim Soo Hyun for having a relation with the deceased, but he wasn't the only one (and it was when she was an adult). Just because someone passed by a street where an accident happened doesn't mean that person caused it, right? There has to be evidence that directly incriminates him. The rest are stories for the public, hungry for fictional sensationalism.

Of course! A part of an ongoing forensic report cannot be disclosed in South Korea because investigations are kept confidential to protect their integrity. The National Police Agency (NPA) and Prosecutors' Office (PO) may inform the public about the investigation's progress, and certain sensitive information can be disclosed when it is considered a matter of public interest. Not in this case. The information contained in forensic reports is considered personal and is protected under the PIPA. Disclosure is prohibited. Decisions to disclose information must be approved by the relevant authorities, such as public prosecutors and judicial police officers.
Can the family prove that they have such approval? If not, nothing can be taken into account. But, the media only follows the sensational, they are not interested in truth. They believe that all are stup!d.

This time, Garo0 placed the wrong bet. He didn’t anticipate this outcome. And no, I’m not referring to the Kim Soo-hyun case. In that matter, he knew the truth, and it was predictable that Kim Soo-hyun would win, even if he didn’t expect him to resist the pressure so firmly.
I’m referring to the bet on power. He didn’t expect to become a tool — used to create noise and then discarded once he was no longer needed. He didn’t foresee the current political shift or the fact that the circle is tightening around those who already saw themselves as victorious.
But above all, he didn’t expect the very people he indirectly supported to get rid of him. He tried to play both sides and ended up being shut out by both.
Or at least, that’s how it seems…

When I see the same posts, the same messages directly attacking those who support Kim Soo-hyun, and the same accusations that even the deceased’s family no longer endorses, I can’t help but think these people are pawns , trapped in a narrow mindset and taking pleasure in the misfortune of others, as if they had no other source of joy.
To their disappointment, they take this pleasure in vain, and deep down, they know it. There aren’t even many of them; they’re simply repeating themselves under different names to appear numerous, but their lack of creativity gives them away.
Sometimes I wonder under which new username she/they will write next. At least that part shows a hint of creativity…

The case of Kim Soo-hyun has brought to the forefront a real danger of the future: cyberbullying, cyber-wreckers, cancel culture fueled by gossip or baseless accusations, and the growing violence within the online environment. Those who recognize this danger cannot remain silent. Today there is one victim; tomorrow there will be another, and one day, if we stay silent, any of us could become the next target.
We all know that a new era has begun, one dominated by artificial intelligence and the internet, and this is exactly where the crimes of the future will occur as well. In a civilized society, laws exist to protect individuals, but the online environment is still in its early stages, and it is already creating victims. That’s why @kdramacich is admirable and it is encouraging to see people who understand what is happening and who are not deceived by online manipulation.
Yes, in South Korea Christianity has spread widely, and naturally, antagonistic attacks have followed. But it is comforting to see people online who say, “It is true that I believe in God, and God tells us to love one another and care for each other. We should pray for one another, not wish harm on anyone.”
With people like this, the internet era can still become a safe place.
God bless you!

Warning Regarding the Dissemination of False Information and Private Materials Through Online Platforms, and Advisory Concerning Attorney Bu Ji-seok
ACCORDING TO THE RECENT STATEMENTS MADE BY ATTORNEY BU JI-SEOK, IT APPEARS THAT MS. LEE AND THE BEREAVED FAMILY HAVE, IN EFFECT, ADMITTED TO CRIMINAL CONDUCT.
While we have little concern regarding legacy media, we earnestly advise YouTube channels such as Gaseyeon, the Kwon Young-chan channel, and other online platforms to exercise extreme caution and fully recognize the legal risks associated with further violations of law.
The core false allegations jointly fabricated and disseminated by the suspects in this case are as follows: “Actor Kim Soo-hyun allegedly had a relationship with the late Ms. Kim Sae-ron since her middle school years (under 16), psychologically dominated and sexually exploited her, and later drove her to death by pressuring her to repay a KRW 700 million debt arising from her DUI accident.”
To persuade the public of this false narrative, they presented the following materials as “evidence”:
1. Photographs which Gaseyeon claimed were proof of a “minor-age relationship” (face-to-face selfie, ski resort photo, etc.)
2. The June 2016 KakaoTalk message (“When can I hold you and fall asleep?”)
3. The April 13, 2018 KakaoTalk message (“If you won’t make an effort, I won’t meet you.”)
However, based on Attorney Bu Ji-seok’s statements recently confirmed through a broadcast interview and follow-up discussions, the bereaved family’s actual position is as follows:
1. THE FAMILY DID NOT TELL KIM SE-UI THAT THE PHOTOS PROVIDED TO GASEYEON WERE TAKEN WHEN THE DECEASED WAS A MINOR.
2. The June 2016 message shows the sender as “Unknown,” and the sole basis for assuming the counterpart was actor Kim Soo-hyun is that “the deceased’s sibling said so.”
3. The April 13, 2018 message exists only as a cropped screenshot, without any sender, recipient, or reply information.
4. THE FAMILY HAS NEVER THOUGHT OR ASSERTED THAT THE DECEASED SUFFERED OR DIED BECAUSE OF ACTOR KIM SOO-HYUN.
These statements are entirely consistent with what I have previously clarified:
1. The photos presented as “minor-age dating evidence” were all taken between December 2019 and early spring 2020, during a short period of adult relationship.
2. The June 2016 KakaoTalk message was an exchange between the deceased and another man—not actor Kim Soo-hyun.
3. The April 13, 2018 message is worthless as evidence, as its sender cannot be identified and it could not have been sent to the actor.
4. WITH THE BEREAVED FAMILY HAVING EXPLICITLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE ACTOR HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE DECEASED’S DEATH, THE ENTIRE FOUNDATIONAL PREMISE OF THIS FALSE-INFORMATION CASE HAS COLLAPSED.
Given the bereaved family’s now-verified position, some degree of factual dispute between the family and Kim Se-ui appears inevitable, and we expect the investigative authorities to determine the truth.
Separately, because the family—the source of all information and material—has stated its position clearly, the essential structure of this cybercrime case has already been fully revealed. --- Accordingly, all remaining non-essential materials related to the actor’s private life— including adult-period photographs disclosed by Gaseyeon, postcards, letters, and even the personal diary entries we were compelled to submit during open argument— all constitute private materials that should never have been disclosed without the actor’s consent. The act of broadcasting such private materials without the actor’s consent constitutes a civil tort in itself.
Furthermore, as noted above, the core allegations against the actor have been proven false by the very sources who supplied the information (Ms. Lee and the family), leaving no possibility for Gaseyeon to claim any public-interest justification for their disclosure.
We therefore state the following clearly: From this point forward, any dissemination of the actor’s private materials—regardless of whether such materials were previously released by Gaseyeon—without the actor’s consent will result in civil action for damages and, where appropriate, additional criminal proceedings.
WITH THE BEREAVED FAMILY’S POSITION NOW CONFIRMED, THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LARGE-SCALE FRAUD PERPETRATED BY GASEYEON UPON THE PUBLIC IS EVIDENT.
As repeatedly seen during the March 27 and May 7 press conferences, the further transmission or amplification of manipulated, contaminated, or private materials through news articles, broadcasts, or YouTube channels will trigger additional legal liability.
Thus, in particular, Gaseyeon, the Kwon Young-chan channel, certain attorney-run YouTube channels, and all other online new-media platforms must fully recognize the significant legal risks involved and exercise extraordinary caution going forward.
--- Additionally, we will be sending Attorney Bu Ji-seok a content-certified letter today, conveying our concerns regarding further criminal acts or secondary harm, and formally demanding that he cease all improper communications with Gaseyeon, Kwon Young-chan, and other online channels.
We therefore request that all media exercise heightened caution when contacting or engaging Attorney Bu Ji-seok from this point forward.
November 14, 2025
Legal Representative for Actor Kim Soo-hyun PIL Law Office Attorney Sang-rock Kho

If Attorney Bu Ji-seok discloses this material and once again claims that it pertains to actor Kim Soo-hyun, then based on what we have already confirmed, we will have no choice but to state who we believe the other individual actually is, and why we have reached that conclusion. I sincerely urge the bereaved family and Attorney Bu to make a careful and prudent decision.

I do not wish to speak any further about the personal life of the deceased. My heart is already heavy, and I have been forced to make difficult choices for far too long. Since you have said the material was submitted to the investigative authorities, I ask that you allow them to make the determination.

I respectfully and earnestly request your consideration.
November 13, 2025
Legal Representative for Actor Kim Soo-hyun PIL Law Office Attorney Sang-rock Kho

Dark comedy!

We expect the police’s decision soon, even though they (Garo0,the family&comp) appear to be desperately trying to delay it with these contradictory statements. Any further delay would once again damage the credibility of the Gangnam Police.

In a phone interview with the YouTube channel “Saemaeul Broadcasting” immediately after the questioning, Kim Se-ui said,

“The questioning ended smoothly in about three hours. I get along well with the team leaders. I’m not afraid of investigations even though there are many cases. I answered everything faithfully, and since I’ve been through so many of these, the process was simple and quick.”
https://m.entertain.naver.com/home/article/416/0000318567

[Statement Regarding the Progress of the Late Kim Sae-ron Case and Attorney Bu Ji-seok’s Claims on Behalf of the Bereaved Family]
1. Changes suggesting an acceleration of the investigation have been observed within the investigative team. It is possible that this is the next procedural step following the National Forensic Service’s analysis of the alleged voice recording of the deceased. Separately from the criticisms I have raised, I understand that investigations require confidentiality, and I expect the police to exercise sound judgment and conclude the investigation properly.
What follows are the claims made by Attorney Bu Ji-seok, representative of the bereaved family, as relayed through media broadcasts.
2. The so-called “thousands of photographs” do not exist. Of course they do not—because they cannot exist. It was reported that Attorney Bu said, “I don’t know why Garo Sero Institute (Gaseyeon) would say such a thing,” but Attorney Bu had more than enough time to confront Kim Se-eui (of Gaseyeon) and ask him, “Why would you say such a thing?”
After the joint press conference on March 27, Kim Se-eui immediately claimed there were thousands of photos. On May 7, Attorney Bu held another joint press conference with him, and instead of these supposed photos, played audio recordings allegedly provided by a New Jersey informant—recordings of the deceased, attorney Kang Yong-seok, Lee Jin-ho, an English listening test involving a “white American wife,” and an associate of attorney Go Sang-rok—and asserted they were real.
3. Regarding photos that Gaseyeon claimed were from the deceased’s “minor years,” including ski resort photos, Attorney Bu reportedly said, “I never told Gaseyeon that those were photos of the deceased when she was a minor.”
In other words, once again, he claims he doesn't know why Kim Se-eui said such a thing. Yet after March 10, while Kim Se-eui repeatedly made these claims, Attorney Bu remained silent, continued providing additional material, and co-played the audio recordings during the May 7 press conference.
4. Regarding the photo from late February 2020 showing the deceased and actor Kim Soo-hyun with their faces close together, Attorney Bu said, “That photo had already been released before I became the family’s legal representative, so I have nothing to say about it.”
The intent of this statement is unclear, but it appears he acknowledges the photo was taken in late February 2020. The family claims they believed this photo—taken when she was a university sophomore—was from her first year of high school, which, as I have stated many times, is extremely difficult to accept rationally.
5. The June 2016 KakaoTalk message (“When can I hold you and fall asleep?”) shows the sender as “Unknown.” The reason it was asserted to be Kim Soo-hyun was reportedly based on a claim made by the deceased’s younger sibling—an explanation so illogical it brings on incredulous laughter.
The claim is that a high school freshman girl would exchange messages like “When can I hold you and fall asleep?” with a man, then show those messages to her even younger middle-school-aged sibling and tell them who he was. The idea that the sibling could clearly recall such an unnatural conversation from 9 years ago is itself implausible.
6. Regarding the April 13, 2018 KakaoTalk message (“If you’re not going to try, then we shouldn’t meet”), they claim the only version that exists is the screenshot Gaseyeon released. This is hard to believe, and even if true, no convincing evidence has been presented to justify identifying the other party as Kim Soo-hyun. I could not ask further questions, but it still gives the impression that something is being hidden. I have repeatedly stated that it is impossible for that message to have been sent to Kim Soo-hyun.
7. There are no additional military letters beyond the one publicly released.
The family claims, “It wasn’t physical letters, but internet letters the aunt saw.” This claim fails logically. Military internet letters at the time were messages sent to soldiers via a public online portal and were printed and distributed by drill instructors. Soldiers did not send them outward, and all contents were publicly accessible.
Kim Soo-hyun did not send private emails to the deceased during military service. Thus, the aunt’s claim that she accessed personal messages from his military period would only be possible if she illegally accessed the deceased’s email account—in other words, hacked it. If such material exists, it should be released immediately.
8. The supposed evidence Gaseyeon did not release turned out to be a letter the deceased allegedly wrote alone in September 2017. It does not specify a recipient, and the family does not claim it was sent to anyone. I was allowed to read it under the condition that no copies or photos be made. When I asked Kim Soo-hyun about it, he firmly stated that it was impossible for her to have written such a letter to him at that time.
My impression of the letter was that it meant, “If you tell me clearly, I can wait and we can be . I looked into the evidence that Ga Se-yeon, who claimed to have a lawyer named Bu Ji-seok, did not disclose. It was a letter written by the deceased alone around September 2017. The recipient of the letter is not identified, and the bereaved family does not claim that the deceased sent it to anyone at the time. I read it alone, assuming that no photos or copies were allowed. Later, when I asked actor Kim Soo-hyun, he assured me that it was impossible for the deceased to have written such a letter to him at that time. As far as I remember, the letter said something along the lines of, "If you tell me for sure, we can meet again and wait." Their argument is that this is "waiting for someone about to enlist," and therefore "it was written for actor Kim Soo-hyun." However, in this context, "waiting" could mean studying abroad, training, a long-term overseas location, or even waiting for the other person to break up/divorce with another lover or spouse. Or it could simply mean that he can wait until his mind is completely made up or settled on something. That's the feeling I get. And while the word "military" doesn't appear in the writing, if it were the military, it could refer to another civilian/military person who was about to enlist, currently serving, or soon to be discharged. While this might be rude to the deceased, the company and his former manager understand that, based on his dating patterns during his lifetime, he wouldn't be the type of person to wait two years for a lover in the military. Furthermore, according to the materials the company inevitably investigated and presented to the police in preparation for the investigation and trial following this incident, none of the 25-30 men the deceased had or was known to have dated during his lifetime were military men. Throughout all of this, the deceased's relationships with his lovers never lasted more than a year. Most relationships lasted only three or four months. Therefore, the above writing, allegedly left by the deceased, has no evidentiary value as supporting a nonexistent fact. He reportedly submitted it to the police, but I understand the police aren't paying attention to it. We did not request metadata, and I believe the content itself does not require it. Separately, if the police confirm evidence of post-facto manipulation, this in itself would be grounds for arrest. I heard that Attorney Bu Ji-seok is requesting that the above-mentioned data be broadcast on public broadcasting while not directly disclosing it. I view this as an attempt to avoid additional legal risks associated with spreading false information, shift that risk to the media, and rekindle unnecessary controversy.
I again urge media organizations to exercise caution and provide right of reply if they report on it.
9. The soy-sauce crab KakaoTalk message addressed to “ㅇㅇ-ah” was, to my recollection, originally “Il-bong-ah.” It is unclear whether “Il-bong” suits an adult actress. They claim the three sisters were called Il-bong, Yi-bong, and Sam-bong. If such messages with verified metadata are submitted to authorities, I will withdraw suspicion. However, it does not change the fact that the deceased had been effectively estranged from her parents for years before her death.
10. The claim that Kim Soo-hyun gave her the nickname “Sero Nero” is false. He told me he simply repeated what others already called her. In fact, she posted “Saero Nero” on her Twitter herself on May 21, 2016.
11. THE FAMILY NOW CLAIMS THEY NEVER BELIEVED OR ALLEGED THAT KIM SOO-HYUN DROVE HER TO DEATH, AND THAT THEY STILL DO NOT THINK SO. IF TRUE, THEN THEIR STANCE DIFFERS FROM KIM SE-EUI’S, WHO REPEATEDLY SAID EXACTLY THAT. YET THERE IS NO RECORD OF THE FAMILY OR ATTORNEY BU EVER CHALLENGING HIM: “WHY ARE YOU CLAIMING SOMETHING WE NEVER SAID?”
12. The family reportedly harbors resentment toward a YouTuber and journalist who reported on her drunk-driving incident, nightlife, and U.S. marriage photo post.
However, when the aunt claimed that the deceased attempted self-harm on January 8, 2025 after those reports, it was later confirmed the deceased was not even in Korea at that time—she was in the U.S. filing marriage paperwork. Attorney Bu now says, “She did not attempt self-harm on Jan 8 itself, but later, because of what happened on Jan 8.” This explanation still does not make sense. There is also audio proof that her agency and manager discussed crisis messaging before the U.S. photo news ever broke.
13. The family describes the mother as severely frail and emotionally incapacitated, weighing only 30kg.
However, on November 2, 2025, she appeared healthy and smiling at a celebrity-attended animal welfare event with the deceased’s sister and aunt. Even accounting for dieting, she does not appear to weigh 30kg, a state in which basic daily functioning would already be challenging, let alone volunteering.
14. The family claims closeness because the deceased used her mother’s credit card. I fail to see how this proves closeness rather than indicating other issues. The deceased reportedly had major debts, including over 500 million KRW borrowed from acquaintances, separate from the 700 million KRW that her agency later forgave.
Using a parent’s credit card at age 25 is not proof of intimacy, and plenty of contradictory evidence exists—including self-harm records, concealed marriage, and a shocking call recording I have not yet disclosed publicly out of concern for backlash.
15. The invitation to a drinking party during her self-reflection period was framed as “a kind event arranged by friends when she was depressed.” I personally believe such things should not be newsworthy and that media and YouTubers should self-reflect.
However, the invitation was sent personally by her, and there is no verified proof it was created by anyone else.
I also possess an August 11, 2022 recording in which she thanked her agency and said, “I’m mentally strong, I don’t care what others say.” One month later, without informing her company or attorney, she flew to Europe for an extended, unexplained trip, contradicting her earlier statements.
By November 5, 2022, she was again socializing at drinking parties, drawing public criticism.
16. This marked the end of her relationship with Goldmedalist. In March 2024, she uploaded and deleted the ambiguous “cheek-to-cheek” photo.
The company perceived it as a threat, and although they never expected repayment, they permanently forgave the 700 million KRW owed to them. Her plan succeeded.
17. One year later, she passed away. As if waiting for this moment, the false statement, unsent fabricated letter, and a previously unreleased kissing-cheek photo from the same 2020 day were all published by Gaseyeon.
18. Even on the day the commissioner acknowledged flaws and delays in investigating him, Kim Se-eui repeated that “Kim Soo-hyun drove Kim Sae-ron to death,” contradicting even the family’s current stated position. This was his last public statement. He can no longer avoid investigation.
attorney Kho Sang - rock

Reading your message, I can only agree with Danny Millo. It does not convey neutrality. From the way you address both sides, I see you repeating the accusations against him, but I see nothing specific mentioned about the lies and falsified evidence presented by the other side. True neutrality would have required acknowledging at least some of the fabricated claims that led to his unjust incrimination.
I quote your text regarding KSH below:
“From my point of view, these are the facts
Kim Sae Ron died on his birthday
They actually dated
Suddenly, Garo sero exposed him and her family also did”
…
“he is not the only one to be responsible for her death even if he is really involved
He cried during the press conference about this matter (fake or not)
He lost many sponsorships and money because of accusations and his drama got delayed”
And your text regarding the other side:
“Garo sero and her family are in the heat for their accusations (The tables are turned somehow)”
“Her family, netizens, the whole industry and certain influencers contributed to her death”
Don't the remarks seem unbalanced?
And yes, there are many who are sensitive to statements that present themselves as neutral yet may appear to lean in a certain direction. I’m not accusing you of anything, I’m simply pointing out that, if you intended to convey something different, that intention may not have been conveyed clearly, or the message wasn’t clear enough. Whether intentional or not, some may interpret the wording as persuasive rather than neutral, which is why those who value the truth feel the need to raise this gently and in good faith.

I agree with you. The only important thing is that it was made public in the Grand National Assembly that the investigations into Kim Se-ui's case are being delayed, and that puts pressure on the investigators.

It is known that the alleged scammer from New Jersey provided one side with a recording in which the deceased acknowledged having had a relationship with KSH only after becoming an adult, while giving the deceased’s family a recording stating the opposite. Kim Se-ui knew this but still made the recording public, without caring that it was not authentic. The police are waiting for the forensic analysis results, which is correct. But since when does this kind of analysis take more than 3 months, while the police do nothing but wait? Also, NJ’ scammer’s identity is known, but nothing happens. For now. But not for long.

God of business” claims he has demanded documents from the Garosero Research Institute and will soon release evidence that politicians, business figures, artists, and others have “paid” Garo0. If proven true, and combined with the recording made public at the National Assembly, which allegedly shows that certain politicians were “sponsored”, this Institute would be nothing less than a criminal organization engaging in the blackmail of public figures.

A lie always finds a mouthpiece, one loud enough to be heard, one deceptive enough to appear to be what it is not, one that creates the illusion of many voices when in truth there is only one. This is why the truth must never be silenced. It must rise with an unshakable force, carried by those who refuse to bow before the noise of lies, unbroken, unintimidated, unwavering.