The cases they are taking are based on truth but the resolutions are unrealistic. Most of these cases would have…
The logic was sound and solid. But in reality, no judge will actually accept that no matter how perfect it was. If the Supreme Court does agree for reason, this will be the fallout:
- China: the Dragon Emperor will eat the judges - North Korea: the Supreme Leader will shoot them on live TV - Russia: the Czar will imprison them and use them for experiments - Iran: you'll never know what hit you, but you'll be called heroes because it was apparently the enemies of Iran that murdered them - US: you'll get elected as President - Australia: they'll blame the Philippines instead of admitting their incompetence
The cases they are taking are based on truth but the resolutions are unrealistic. Most of these cases would have…
Correct. Like in E06, trapping the judge in such an argument as two countries in the same territorial boundaries can get an attorney dismissed in the court.
And a judge agreeing to it on an official basis is opening up a potential constitutional crisis and civil war. If it reaches the Supreme Court, it's a guaranteed 100% "no". Unless the judges in the Supreme Court are as crazy as the attorney, and the appeals court, and the lower court judges who agreed to it. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
These cases continue to be so interesting and full of twists. I’m glad this show is highlighting the marginalized…
I'm suspecting it has to do with her father. She knows something about his father and she doesn't agree with him.
She likely decided that the ML is her best ally, but she cannot afford to reveal the secret she discovered about her father because the ML's mouth can't be trusted to keep some things under wraps. 😂
If my analysis is correct, she's practically holding a double-edged sword by the blade. She is hurting herself by fighting against her father who is proud of the power he has, and she is also hurting herself by using a friend and colleague to the point that she had to orchestrate a fake bribery to get him. No matter what happens, she will never be the winner. She's going to lose the power her father built, and she's going to lose a powerful friend.
I don't get why the CEO's father wants to disband the Pro Bono team
It will be explained in the rest of the episodes.
But if you're looking for speculations, I'd say, it's a typical conglomerate mindset in fiction. For example, he repeatedly told his daughter that he is happy if he has power. When a person says something like that, expect them to use that power however they want because it means proving that they have the power to do anything they want.
Yes, there are good people who use their power for good. But power does corrupt. And even if you don't intend to, power can make someone else's life miserable.
We can safely say that the father, at this point, is simply enjoying having that power and using it.
It is also possible that the cases the Pro Bono team handled eventually all have connections to the father. For example, the father was probably the one who made sure the President gets elected. The Pro Bono team almost set up the President to become a total clown in the world stage.
If he was indeed the one who placed the President there, it is a grave insult to almost turn the President as a laughing stock. The father will take that as a declaration of war. So, he told his daughter to disband them. Better do it early before they make more issues for him.
If that theory is correct, then the power he is talking about is: I am the real ruler of South Korea.
No, it is actually very realistic.Many first-world countries often have issues where couples get married and then…
There's that too. Destination countries ends up carrying the burden if they don't get strict on who can enter, or don't get strict in deportations.
The border system, economic system, and our "national pride" / patriotism / nationalism, are what's causing these inequality, discrimination, desperation, and poverty. It's really sad we can't get over these artificial systems our forefathers created.
GalacticTheory said it was Burmese (Myanmar). Since she's brown, yeah, definitely Asian.
In another thread somewhere, Bangladeshi. Which is also possible since these countries are neighbours and the Burmese language has a wider spread than it's current State borders. (Burmese is also spoken in some parts of Tibet for example.)
did they explain why she married re tard boy in the first place? seems very unrealistic. for citizenship? she…
No, it is actually very realistic.
Many first-world countries often have issues where couples get married and then divorce later. The native gets paid for it.
It is actually no longer easy of couples, where one is Korean, to travel to Korea together. Korean embassies often ask ridiculous proofs to prove they're actually a couple. It doesn't matter if.they have a kid or is married because again, under the right conditions, they can divorce in Korea without the spouse getting deported, even naturalised as a Korean citizen.
The strictness is understandable because there really are bad actors abusing the system.
So, yep, it is realistic. It still is happening to this day and will always happen for as long as there is poverty and borders.
Leave the developed and developing country debate aside for a moment, just go through the epstein files and you…
This.
To summarize what Socialpulse said, not because you're not seeing it in news and social media does it mean it isn't happening.
To Blue_Umbrella: It's no different from Japan. Foreigners worship Japan as if it is a utopia. Foreigners will even defend Japan if people are saying negative things about it—they'll even dismiss a native Japanese, as if they know better than the locals. They look down on their own country to protect themselves worhipping Japan.
But behind all that, there is one major issue that many Japanese are crying out for help—Japanese women's rights. The world is obliviously about it because: 1. Japan is so damn good at hiding the issue, or toning it down 2. Foreigners are worshipping Japan as the perfect country and culture. Thus they deny the negative things because it will destroy that image.
For decades, many mangaka, especially women, are limited to voicing their plea through their works because if they literally voice it, they're systematically cancelled by the patriarchy system. Yes, there have been improvements, but it still is a far cry from being a decent improvement.
Sure, South Korea is this and that. But that's only what we are seeing as foreigners. For one, not every news from S.K. is being translated into English.
I'm from the Philippines, and you'll see a lot of vloggers and bloggers—local and foreigners alike—talk about the Philippines like some paradise. That's only the surface. No one is talking about the ugly parts because you'll either get cancelled or branded as a communist.
I think it is safe to say that every country is like that. We're good at hiding the ugly truth from foreigners.
Look at Australia. Instead of calling out the pathetic incompetence of Australia's intelligence and security networks, they invented a fake news that the Philippines is an IS training ground. That is Australia's way of hiding their pathetic incompetence, use another country as a scapegoat, change narrative. The suspects are Australians and they blame another country. Epicly pathetic and incompetent.
The asylum argument is logically sound and solid but is also equally ridiculous. The Pro Bono team, especially the ex-judge, was correct that they'll lose the trial but win the case.
If they pursued it instead of accepting the deal, they'll eventually lose in the Supreme Court even if they win in the appeal court. The Supreme Court will never accept that there are two countries occupying the Constitutionally defined territory of the State. That's bullocks. If the Supreme Court accepts that argument, then there will a Constitutional crisis and open civil war. The State will be divided. Blood will be spilled.
This episode is a very good topic in Political Science subject. I wish I'm still in college because I will definitely force our PolSci professor to discuss this. I love arguments like this.
1 
We're finally going to see YeEun compete in these type of games in RM. Hehehe.
It's too sad Daniel didn't make it to next week's episode.
- China: the Dragon Emperor will eat the judges
- North Korea: the Supreme Leader will shoot them on live TV
- Russia: the Czar will imprison them and use them for experiments
- Iran: you'll never know what hit you, but you'll be called heroes because it was apparently the enemies of Iran that murdered them
- US: you'll get elected as President
- Australia: they'll blame the Philippines instead of admitting their incompetence
And a judge agreeing to it on an official basis is opening up a potential constitutional crisis and civil war. If it reaches the Supreme Court, it's a guaranteed 100% "no". Unless the judges in the Supreme Court are as crazy as the attorney, and the appeals court, and the lower court judges who agreed to it. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
She likely decided that the ML is her best ally, but she cannot afford to reveal the secret she discovered about her father because the ML's mouth can't be trusted to keep some things under wraps. 😂
If my analysis is correct, she's practically holding a double-edged sword by the blade. She is hurting herself by fighting against her father who is proud of the power he has, and she is also hurting herself by using a friend and colleague to the point that she had to orchestrate a fake bribery to get him. No matter what happens, she will never be the winner. She's going to lose the power her father built, and she's going to lose a powerful friend.
But if you're looking for speculations, I'd say, it's a typical conglomerate mindset in fiction. For example, he repeatedly told his daughter that he is happy if he has power. When a person says something like that, expect them to use that power however they want because it means proving that they have the power to do anything they want.
Yes, there are good people who use their power for good. But power does corrupt. And even if you don't intend to, power can make someone else's life miserable.
We can safely say that the father, at this point, is simply enjoying having that power and using it.
It is also possible that the cases the Pro Bono team handled eventually all have connections to the father. For example, the father was probably the one who made sure the President gets elected. The Pro Bono team almost set up the President to become a total clown in the world stage.
If he was indeed the one who placed the President there, it is a grave insult to almost turn the President as a laughing stock. The father will take that as a declaration of war. So, he told his daughter to disband them. Better do it early before they make more issues for him.
If that theory is correct, then the power he is talking about is: I am the real ruler of South Korea.
The border system, economic system, and our "national pride" / patriotism / nationalism, are what's causing these inequality, discrimination, desperation, and poverty. It's really sad we can't get over these artificial systems our forefathers created.
In another thread somewhere, Bangladeshi. Which is also possible since these countries are neighbours and the Burmese language has a wider spread than it's current State borders. (Burmese is also spoken in some parts of Tibet for example.)
Many first-world countries often have issues where couples get married and then divorce later. The native gets paid for it.
It is actually no longer easy of couples, where one is Korean, to travel to Korea together. Korean embassies often ask ridiculous proofs to prove they're actually a couple. It doesn't matter if.they have a kid or is married because again, under the right conditions, they can divorce in Korea without the spouse getting deported, even naturalised as a Korean citizen.
The strictness is understandable because there really are bad actors abusing the system.
So, yep, it is realistic. It still is happening to this day and will always happen for as long as there is poverty and borders.
To summarize what Socialpulse said, not because you're not seeing it in news and social media does it mean it isn't happening.
To Blue_Umbrella:
It's no different from Japan. Foreigners worship Japan as if it is a utopia. Foreigners will even defend Japan if people are saying negative things about it—they'll even dismiss a native Japanese, as if they know better than the locals. They look down on their own country to protect themselves worhipping Japan.
But behind all that, there is one major issue that many Japanese are crying out for help—Japanese women's rights. The world is obliviously about it because:
1. Japan is so damn good at hiding the issue, or toning it down
2. Foreigners are worshipping Japan as the perfect country and culture. Thus they deny the negative things because it will destroy that image.
For decades, many mangaka, especially women, are limited to voicing their plea through their works because if they literally voice it, they're systematically cancelled by the patriarchy system. Yes, there have been improvements, but it still is a far cry from being a decent improvement.
Sure, South Korea is this and that. But that's only what we are seeing as foreigners. For one, not every news from S.K. is being translated into English.
I'm from the Philippines, and you'll see a lot of vloggers and bloggers—local and foreigners alike—talk about the Philippines like some paradise. That's only the surface. No one is talking about the ugly parts because you'll either get cancelled or branded as a communist.
I think it is safe to say that every country is like that. We're good at hiding the ugly truth from foreigners.
Look at Australia. Instead of calling out the pathetic incompetence of Australia's intelligence and security networks, they invented a fake news that the Philippines is an IS training ground. That is Australia's way of hiding their pathetic incompetence, use another country as a scapegoat, change narrative. The suspects are Australians and they blame another country. Epicly pathetic and incompetent.
If they pursued it instead of accepting the deal, they'll eventually lose in the Supreme Court even if they win in the appeal court. The Supreme Court will never accept that there are two countries occupying the Constitutionally defined territory of the State. That's bullocks. If the Supreme Court accepts that argument, then there will a Constitutional crisis and open civil war. The State will be divided. Blood will be spilled.
This episode is a very good topic in Political Science subject. I wish I'm still in college because I will definitely force our PolSci professor to discuss this. I love arguments like this.