PrettyCarEye

I noticed that too so you're totally right. I was wondering the same thing, which is why the drama lost some points for me because it wasn't always consistent. There were some very blatant plot holes which I'm not used to seeing in J-dramas. Usually, there stuff is very tight and logically written.

Evidence can be circumstancial, but it never lies. Even when circumstancial, it shows you the sum of what likely happened when all the pieces are put together. For some that can be confusing or even misleading, but what it's showing you is not a lie. That's why I'll take the evidence over anyone's word any day.

In cases like these, I remain neutral until the evidence provided leads me to a conclusion. I don't believe all women. I don't believe all men. I don't disbelieve them either. I am just dispassionate about human nature. And you have to be when you interpret the law, as I think the judge was when ruling on their individual cases.

Plus hard living: drinking, smoking, and for many, drugs.

In the cultural context of SK where women are encouraged to be subordinate to men, I would say the pendelum does tend to swing toward an accuser being more truthful in situations where a rape claim is made.

That said, women may also succumb to the afflictions of human nature -avarice/greed, revenge. She could have seen him as an easy target for a payday or to seek revenge against him for some other reason (if she wasn't motivated by money). It does happen.

That is why we all should believe evidence, not humans.

I am not getting involved in this argument of whether he is or isn't a rapist. I'm not interested. However, just from a legal standpoint the exchange of remarks on his guilt or innocence is interesting and I would just like to pose the following question:

Is it culturally practiced in SK to get verbal consent for intimate acts? In general, I don't think so. And I think in most places, even in the West, it is not a foregone conclusion that either party should seek affirmative verbal consent to engage in intimate encounters. Consent is assumed until it is withdrawn, verbally and or physically by either party. So indeed, if a person kiss another person and both actively participate in the kiss, it is assumed consent is established. Until one party verbally and/or physically resists.

So I believe the court's point was that he did not seek out verbal consent & Lee himself might have indeed admitted to this. But this may not have been an incriminating admission within the context of SK culture where consent is assumed until withdrawn. That's why the court inspite of this admission laid a "not guilty" verdict in his case because that (cultural) context may have been taken into consideration during deliberations. Put another way, the plaintiff may have very well felt that she was raped, but if the defendant did not understand that she felt like she was being raped because he in good faith acted within the culturally acceptable fashion regarding these matters AND because she didn't resist verbally or physically, then he must be found "not guilty".

It is also interesting to note that the court applied the same logic to the plaintiff when she was countersued by the defendant for defamation/false accusation. The court acknowledged that the plaintiff may very well have been raped because even if it is culturally acceptable to assume consent unless it is explicitly withdrawn, if the plaintiff feels she was raped, then she was raped (because she may have indeed resisted either verbally & physically, but the defendant ignored her resistance). She was thus found "not guilty" for making what the defendant claimed was a "false & defamatory accusation".

The court acknowledge the greviances of both parties, but could not render a guilty verdict on either side because essentially it is a he said/she said scenario. They don't know what happened, he may not have raped her but he also may have raped her. The court couldn't make a determination based on the evidence provided from either side, so the cases were essentially thrown out with a not guilty verdict for both.

Remember, however, that "not guilty" doesn't necessarily mean "innocent". It means "nobody knows & it is better to let a guilty person walk free than to wrongfully persecute an innocent person".

What I gleaned from the article:

The court basically said that neither party provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim & dropped the case by finding them both "not guilty".

In other words, he couldn't prove that she consented to sex with him. But neither could she prove that she did not give consent.

The judgement seems to further suggest that both parties could have given signals that the other misinterpreted. Therefore, no way for the court to know exactly what transpired. Thus, not guilty & not guilty.

I am not getting involved in this argument in any way. Just wanted to clarify the legal definitions: "not guilty" does not mean "innocent" necessarily. In fact the legal system's main function is not to determine innocence, but to judge whether sufficient evidence is provided to deem a defendant "guilty". As such, a "not guilty" verdict simply means that the court did not hear sufficient evidence to indicate the defendant is guilty of the accused crime.

I 100% agree with this take. I felt like S2 had me more on the edge of my seat once the games were in play. I'll have to rewatch S1 to be sure, but that's my initial impression. As you observed, tighter & more developed script for sure. The only loose end I think they could have incorporated more seamlessly into the narrative, was the policeman arc. Some of his scenes were sometimes a bit random, not flowing seamlessly into the overarching storyline as it should have. That said I definitely don't agree with the reviews above. While the concept is familiar, the games still imbued a sufficient sense of dread & horror. And also a S2 is justified by the ML's motivation to stop the games (that's totally in line with his character, who he is as a person). An empathetic & kind man despite his personal flaws & shortcomings juxtaposed against the Front Man's psychopathy that wants to continue them.

You clearly don't know the meaning of the word. You don't have to curse at me or say something offensive to be intolerant. You told me to stop watching Korean dramas just because you disagreed with my opinion. An opinion expressed on a public platform where watchers are encouraged to share their views (otherwise there would't be a comment section). That's intolerance.

And I think you should stay off the internet if you can't tolerate opinions that differ from your own.

Not really. Bittersweet? It appears both lead characters died in the end, but reunited in the afterlife. The closing sequence was rather upbeat and unlikely to leave you in a dour mood.

Thanks so much!

A slightly older series, but decent imo: The Masked Lover

Where?

Sure, no worries. :)

Well, I didn't check all the episodes, but all 40 eps seem to be available with subs here:
https://pinoymovieshub.mx/episodes/whats-wrong-with-secretary-kim-1x1-2
Be sure to turn captions & choose English. Lower right hand corner of the player, looks like a dialogue box.

Well, I didn't check all the episodes, but all 40 eps seem to be available with subs here:
https://pinoymovieshub.mx/episodes/whats-wrong-with-secretary-kim-1x1-2
Be sure to turn on captions & choose English. Lower right hand corner of the player, looks like a dialogue box.

I agree, I totally enjoyed this & I'm not even mad about the open ending. I think they left enough clues about the personality & psychology of the characters to tell you how they will behave. So I knew Aim would want to delete himself to bring Orn back. Yes, because he does feel a sense of guilt, but mostly because her deletion was totally pointless. Her deletion only makes sense if Lilly was willing to stay with him, otherwise why live with all that guilt & questions from her friends & family? BUT if Lilly had chosen him, he would have lived with the guilt because as he said he really isn't a good guy. We know this because only a narcissist/sociopath lies about his entire life story & did not hesitate to essentially kill his GF to be with his mistress.

I also knew Lilly would go back to Too. Because 9 out 10 times the married affair partner never leaves their spouse. And 2, I think Lilly was just vulnerable & looking for love that Too never showed her previously. When Aim was kind & sweet to her (showing her he understood her loneliness), it made her feel good so she ends up having an affair with him to continue having that feeling. But when her husband said he didn't care that she was pregnant by another man & wanted to raise the baby with her if it meant keeping her, she was surprised by the depth of his love. His love was confirmed again when he did everything in his power to find her when she was kidnapped. So that's why she went back to him. She may have loved him before & thought that that love could grow again now that he was finally showing her the type of love she always wanted. I also knew there must have been a reason why Lilly was cheating on Too, but I couldn't quite put my finger on it. I think it was because he may have been a cold husband toward her, but also she may have suspected that he & his dad are up to something shady.

And Too, when Too forgave Lilly & said he wanted to raise the baby, I thought wow, this guy looks tough but he's really a cuck & a simp. But he's not any of those things. I think we got some insight into his character throughout the drama. He loves his wife, but his loyalty is to his father & the their legacy as wealthy farm barons. He's very much his father's son. You can see that he is always the dutiful son by his dad's side, handling his father's business & seeking his counsel, even when he knows his dad is a fucking psycho. He may have even engaged in murdering those women along side his dad. That's why I believe he kept Lilly, yes because he does love her truly ... but also because he can control her, esp now that he can use the affair & the kid against her when she steps out of line. But if push comes to shove & he has to choose between his blood (his father) & her, well there's no choice. The baby she's carrying isn't his anyway.

Very good show! One of the best I've seen in a long time!

This is why women should not propose to men. Men, whether we like it or not, are the purveyors of relationships (in the sense that if a man doesn't want to be with you there is no way you can force him, you may be able to get him to have sex with you but a relationship is another story). If he wanted to have that type of committed relationship with her, best believe he would have been the one to propose. Sure, there can be exceptions, but exceptions never negate the rule.

I agree that Too really loves Lilly and will be reluctant to delete her, but I think that reluctance may end if he perceives her as threat to his & his father's secrets being exposed. Yeah, he loves her, but I don't think he's a complete simp. I think Too will use the fact that he forgave Lilly for the affair & offered to raise her baby as his own as a bargaining chip to control her. If she stops being grateful for his charity, he will have no qualms in deleting her. Which is what I think he did at the end. Because I don't think Lilly will tolerate being with a man who is essentially a serial killer. She will report him if she gets a chance & Too knows this. He knows that his love & charity towards her & her kid will not be enough to keep her loyal so he deletes her.