bayanoh

You are obviously bias and have so much prejudice and outdated views so I'm not going to argue with you. The cases I saw in Europe which I'm referring to were of babies, not even walking yet, so minor marriage wasn't a problem.
"If a kid is homeless and starving, living in dirt and sleeping on the streets - isn't it better to give to that child a possibility to live a decent life?"
No it is not. The better solution is to give their family a home or help them get homes by employing them or training them for example, hell not accepting refugees in the first place would've been a better solution, since I'm sure the families regretted ever stepping foot there to ask for help. If I risk my life to come to a country seeking help for my family then ended up losing my children because I couldn't make ends meet, I would've wished I drowned in the sea or died by my enemies' hands so I wouldn't experience the pain of losing a child.

I don't know what country you are talking about but the cases I saw, the babies were snatched and were given to other native families to raise them. Do you think all adopted children would've chosen to be adopted if living with their poor parents was an option? No, I still would've preferred to struggle with my biological family than live thinking I was taken from them or that they have abandoned me.

I love your comment, because depending on the reader's opinion of Han Hye Jin's acting in the drama, it could be read sarcastically and it fits a little too well. XD
I don't mean to diminish your opinion, please don't misunderstand. I just was fascinated by the way it could be read either way.

I didn't see any of Han Hye Jin's earlier roles so I could've failed to see that is was deliberate for her character to be inconsistent. I didn't put any weight to the romance between the leads. I wasn't here for it and I wasn't expecting it or rooting for it. I just thought she was supposed to be sympathetic (not warm because I can't tell if someone is warm based on snippets of their life), but she insists on taking cases out of "sympathy" for the people involved, yet she fails to see one of the most basic triggers of sympathy which is in my example the suffering of an old lady while serving her a meal. You don't usually ignore someone struggling to do a service for you, let alone an old lady. Even a kid would be more uncomfortable watching the grandma serving them food, but she ignored that like she wasn't even in the room when it happened. This seemed absurd to me. This inconsistency happens often. If we blame the writer for it, I still don't think her acting can represent a real human being, she has a single expression but when she reacts she shows a very exaggerated expression that can only be seen in Korean dramas. I really wanted to think that her character matched her acting, but I couldn't, so I envy you, you must've enjoyed the series more.

I didn't mean she committed suicide. I meant the only way the stepmother could be guilty (morally) of her death is if she said "just go die" to someone on the verge of suicide. Not to be on her side or excuse her mean words but they acted like she was the executor, even though the mother may have died anyway. Sorry, I tried so hard to not give any huge spoilers that my previous comment lost meaning. XD

I think she gave away her right though. She wanted the kid to be with his uncle.

We do too, but I think in the US and Europe for example, it's way too easy to take a child from their parents, easier than it should be, if you heard about the refugees and how they snatch their kids away from them just because they are poor or homeless in some of the European countries. That's why I specified South Korea to be safe.
Although, if I may add, in Islamic law, your parents don't have to be dead for the custody to be given to the next in line. If your parents are unfit (drug addicts, physical abusers, neglectful to an extreme..etc), the custody goes to the grandparents, then the uncles/aunts which one is fitter, but of course there must be a strong proof that what the children are experiencing is life threatening, so "lack of love" isn't considered a good reason.

I'm not an expert in law but I don't believe it's that easy to take the custody of a child away from their parents, especially in South Korea where blood means a lot. Until recently, you could even claim the fortune of a child you abandoned after they die just because you gave birth to them.

Yes, the whole phone conversation was showed in episode 11 I think. It wasn't that noteworthy, just some very mean words, but of course understandably it is a big deal if someone was on the verge of suicide.

Han Hye Jin was a huge miscast.
The comedy is 10/10 especially from the three friends.
The emotions are 8/10 from everyone but Lee Seo Jin who everyone seems to do good deeds just to please her even though she herself displays no emotions or apparent sympathy towards others (One scene that comes to mind is the restaurant scene, the rookie lawyer showed way more sympathy towards the grandma's display of pain/discomfort then acted like he was doing the whole thing for Seo Jin who showed no concern at all about the grandma and was like "what's the recipe please").

Bottom Line: This drama would've been great if Lee Seo Jin had disappeared after her trial.

I especially liked the part where everything is explained by the protagonist feeling repentant about his part in the murder. So this wasn't a fantasy after all.

I don't understand why so many people are so pissed at the ending. It wasn't the best drama overall, but it was not bad and the ending was not bad either.

The dazed look is what is overexaggerated. LOL
She seems to over act every expression she makes and they are a few. Just rewatch the scene when she meets the new lawyer at the office. It was okay in the old days because everyone was acting the same way so you don't notice that they are all making weird faces no one makes in real life, but it is out of place now considering everyone else isn't doing it the way she is doing it.

I think Han Hye Jin's acting is stuck in the '00s and the early '10s. I believe overexaggerated facial expressions aren't a thing anymore. I haven't seen those in a while and I don't miss them at all.

I don't know either, even after they explained it, I didn't get it. It seemed like a big overreaction to me, and I thought it was rude to publicly throw away a fan's flowers. It wasn't like he was hitting on her or something. I didn't get the anonymity thing either. It's not like she can just decide on her own to not be famous anymore and expect her fans to stop treating her like a famous person without her publicly announcing her retirement.

No, she doesn't deserve respect because she is old, she deserve respect because she is the reason they exist in this world. LOL
I don't think you deserve respect "just" because you are old, but being respectful towards the elderly should be a given unless they do something that calls for taking away the respect they got, but still even if they did, you should always take the high road when possible. As I'm getting older too, I realize that we are in someway getting more disabled by the second, and I wouldn't be encouraging hitting someone disabled or in this case fragile even if they started it, the same way I wouldn't encourage an adult hitting a child or a man hitting a woman who is physically weaker, even if they hit first, as long as they have the option to just leave the situation, which they did in this instance, they could've just walked away, so it seemed like it is done not to protect the granddaughter from the grandma but to take revenge on the grandma for hitting the granddaughter which I find iffy and makes me uncomfortable.

Let's say we have different ideologies and leave it at that, because in my book a small crime isn't equal to a huge crime but is still a crime. The same goes for things that are immoral but not considered a crime. Because if I believed otherwise, I could steal a dollar a day and end up with 30k dollars and argue that I'm not a criminal because the amount I stole from each person each day is just too small to count.

It is illegal in many countries and it is immoral in the others. I don't think there is any country outside of Europe where adultery is not at least frowned upon. There is no point of being married if you can just have sex with anyone even when you are married. Why is it considered a commitment then when it's okay to not be committed without the other party's consent. If it's not a crime, it doesn't mean it is moral. One could argue that what the husband did isn't a crime either. The only instant as far as we know when he physically abused her was after he discovered that she cheated on him, and that was during the process of divorce. You, yourself said that writing comments in a post-it notes could be overlooked by the court. So, if we are only going to fault someone for committing a crime that is punishable by the law then we shouldn't fault the husband either, but it just doesn't make sense that he gets a pass just because the court said so, does it?

It's because we both agree that his wrong is much worse than hers, so why bother discuss it? My first comment was about them not being equally wrong. I didn't say that they are equally wrong at any point in the conversation. Most adulterers cheat because they are neglected. Why bother make it a crime then? Everyone has an excuse for cheating, even "my partner is boring" is an excuse someone would make. Also, at no point did I say her fault was unforgivable. In fact, I literally said "It's not an unforgivable mistake for a character though". I just believe being poor doesn't excuse stealing.

I don't think you understand my point. I'm not saying she should've left because she was abused, I'm saying she should've considered the option of leaving before having an affair, especially since having an affair would only make things worse for her and her child, at least by trying to get a divorce first, she has a chance to be out of that relationship. I understand the issue about not being able to leave an abusive relationship. I know that it is hard to leave someone since "they didn't mean it" or "because I deserve to be treated this way" or "because I just need to fix myself so that I don't trigger the person I love", but having an affair is a whole different thing on its own. You can't excuse it because someone is abused or neglected. The abuser is very wrong and should be punished, but the adulterer is also wrong, and two wrongs don't make a right.

Did she try though? Maybe it would've worked out, who knows? She was allowed to, she just didn't even try. If it were me, I would take that gamble in a heartbeat, especially for my child, because if I don't, we would be stuck forever in a house with an abuser. Tell me how an affair would solve anything. If anything it only made the abuser more aggressive and gave him an opportunity to act like a victim.

Not saying she is right or that what she did is justified, but I thought her violence could've been handled better. I believe people should show kindness to people who are younger than them, and respect to those who are older. There should be mutual respect between all as in "you are a human being so you should be treated as such", but expecting respect from the people who birthed you as someone of equal status is a bit too much and this is what I would disagree on.