He literally admitted that she didn't give consent, also saying that he was found not guilty when we're talking…
Defending the fake victim is embarrassing too.
"You're discussing affirmative consent? Unfortunately, affirmative consent doesn't necessarily require verbal consent but can also be non-verbal (active actions), and Lee Jin Wook has both.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal) Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
He literally admitted that she didn't give consent, also saying that he was found not guilty when we're talking…
victim?? 🙄🙄
She was found not guilty in the first trial. the judge ignored the evidence and judged based on her emotional only. That’s why the prosecutor appealed the verdict.
She was found guilty in the 2nd trial, but her sentence is 8 months in prison & 2 years of probation — which means she never went to prison even though she destroyed someone’s life and made other real SA victims less credible.
Meanwhile, the REAL VICTIM was condemned as a r@pist, and the FAKE VICTIM was painted as a victim. 🤷♀️🤷♀️
I saw the latest comment from ‘Rus7y’: “Just wanna say that yall people are faster than the light itself when it comes to defending any man, look for any smallest clues under the floorboards to prove their "innocence", but get real quiet when women are confirmed to be victims (AKA Sae Ron case). Yall as easy to read as an YA novel.” But I can’t reply because I’m blocked.
Well, unblock me and answer this: if what you claimed is true, then why do so many people ignore every proof that can prove his innocence and come up with so many stupid excuses to defend ‘Miss Oh’? And when I argued with logic and fact, why do they always pull a ‘misogynist’ card to me? Many people are mad at me just because I don’t side with all women.
In reality, especially on X, most people automatically side with women and assume that men are guilty even though they’re confirmed victims.
This is why the court stated that it’s difficult to completely eliminate the possibility that sexual relations…
These are examples of misunderstanding: - Mistaken identity: For example, the victim was sexually assaulted in a dark place and couldn’t clearly see the perpetrator’s face, leading to a misidentification. - Lack of proof of non-consent: If consent cannot be clearly disproven, the suspect won’t be punished. However, if there isn’t enough evidence to prove that the accuser had malicious intent, the accuser won’t be punished either. - Law not being consent-based (as in Korea’s past legal system): Even if the accuser didn’t want to have sex, if the other party didn’t use violence or threats, it wasn’t legally considered sexual assault — but still, the accuser wouldn’t be punished.
A conviction on this charge requires solid evidence that clearly implicates the accuser. Being not guilty of sexual assault & being not guilty of false accusation is super common. What’s actually rare is false accusers being punished.
It’s difficult to prove a sexual assault, but it’s even more difficult to prove a false accusation.
The court stated, “It's difficult to completely eliminate the possibility that sexual relations took place against…
This is why the court stated that it’s difficult to completely eliminate the possibility that sexual relations took place against her inner wishes. Read this and learn to understand the structure and the intention behind the false accusation law.
👇👇👇👇👇
I’ve seen many people say that Korea takes false accusers more seriously than rapists, which is completely false. A common misunderstanding is that if a suspect is acquitted of sexual assault, the accuser will automatically be convicted of making a false accusation. But in fact, a false accusation law is designed to protect the real sexual abuse victims — those who didn’t lie, but whose cases couldn’t be proven — from being punished. Therefore, it’s extremely difficult to be convicted of this charge because a false accusation doesn’t need truth — just malicious intent; if the accuser just misunderstands, they won’t be convicted.
I’ve seen many people say that Korea takes false accusers more seriously than rapists, which is completely false. A common misunderstanding is that if a suspect is acquitted of sexual assault, the accuser will automatically be convicted of making a false accusation. But in fact, a false accusation law is designed to protect the real sexual abuse victims — those who didn’t lie, but whose cases couldn’t be proven — from being punished. Therefore, it’s extremely difficult to be convicted of this charge because a false accusation doesn’t need truth — just malicious intent; if the accuser just misunderstands, they won’t be convicted.
These are examples of misunderstanding: - Mistaken identity: For example, the victim was sexually assaulted in a dark place and couldn’t clearly see the perpetrator’s face, leading to a misidentification. - Lack of proof of non-consent: If consent cannot be clearly disproven, the suspect won’t be punished. However, if there isn’t enough evidence to prove that the accuser had malicious intent, the accuser won’t be punished either. - Law not being consent-based (as in Korea’s past legal system): Even if the accuser didn’t want to have sex, if the other party didn’t use violence or threats, it wasn’t legally considered sexual assault — but still, the accuser wouldn’t be punished.
A conviction on this charge requires solid evidence that clearly implicates the accuser. Being not guilty of sexual assault & being not guilty of false accusation is super common. What’s actually rare is false accusers being punished.
It’s difficult to prove a sexual assault, but it’s even more difficult to prove a false accusation.
Long texts written by his depraved fans will never erase that he himself told the judge that there was no consent.…
"You're discussing affirmative consent? Unfortunately, affirmative consent doesn't necessarily require verbal consent but can also be non-verbal (active actions), and Lee Jin Wook has both.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal) Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
"You're discussing affirmative consent? Unfortunately, affirmative consent doesn't necessarily require verbal consent but can also be non-verbal (active actions), and Lee Jin Wook has both.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal) Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
So if he can manipulate everything like you claim, then why did his polygraph result is inconclusive instead of clean pass?
"You're discussing affirmative consent? Unfortunately, affirmative consent doesn't necessarily require verbal consent but can also be non-verbal (active actions), and Lee Jin Wook has both.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal)
Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
https://www.allkpop.com/article/2016/07/details-of-the-exchange-between-lee-jin-wook-and-the-woman-he-allegedly-assaulted-revealed
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent
Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
https://ichannela.com/news/main/news_detailPage.do?publishId=79436819-2
Keep deluding yourselves, haters with your mental illness of bullying.
She was found not guilty in the first trial. the judge ignored the evidence and judged based on her emotional only. That’s why the prosecutor appealed the verdict.
She was found guilty in the 2nd trial, but her sentence is 8 months in prison & 2 years of probation — which means she never went to prison even though she destroyed someone’s life and made other real SA victims less credible.
Meanwhile, the REAL VICTIM was condemned as a r@pist, and the FAKE VICTIM was painted as a victim. 🤷♀️🤷♀️
Well, unblock me and answer this: if what you claimed is true, then why do so many people ignore every proof that can prove his innocence and come up with so many stupid excuses to defend ‘Miss Oh’? And when I argued with logic and fact, why do they always pull a ‘misogynist’ card to me? Many people are mad at me just because I don’t side with all women.
In reality, especially on X, most people automatically side with women and assume that men are guilty even though they’re confirmed victims.
- Mistaken identity: For example, the victim was sexually assaulted in a dark place and couldn’t clearly see the perpetrator’s face, leading to a misidentification.
- Lack of proof of non-consent: If consent cannot be clearly disproven, the suspect won’t be punished. However, if there isn’t enough evidence to prove that the accuser had malicious intent, the accuser won’t be punished either.
- Law not being consent-based (as in Korea’s past legal system): Even if the accuser didn’t want to have sex, if the other party didn’t use violence or threats, it wasn’t legally considered sexual assault — but still, the accuser wouldn’t be punished.
A conviction on this charge requires solid evidence that clearly implicates the accuser. Being not guilty of sexual assault & being not guilty of false accusation is super common. What’s actually rare is false accusers being punished.
It’s difficult to prove a sexual assault, but it’s even more difficult to prove a false accusation.
👇👇👇👇👇
I’ve seen many people say that Korea takes false accusers more seriously than rapists, which is completely false. A common misunderstanding is that if a suspect is acquitted of sexual assault, the accuser will automatically be convicted of making a false accusation. But in fact, a false accusation law is designed to protect the real sexual abuse victims — those who didn’t lie, but whose cases couldn’t be proven — from being punished. Therefore, it’s extremely difficult to be convicted of this charge because a false accusation doesn’t need truth — just malicious intent; if the accuser just misunderstands, they won’t be convicted.
I’ve seen many people say that Korea takes false accusers more seriously than rapists, which is completely false. A common misunderstanding is that if a suspect is acquitted of sexual assault, the accuser will automatically be convicted of making a false accusation. But in fact, a false accusation law is designed to protect the real sexual abuse victims — those who didn’t lie, but whose cases couldn’t be proven — from being punished. Therefore, it’s extremely difficult to be convicted of this charge because a false accusation doesn’t need truth — just malicious intent; if the accuser just misunderstands, they won’t be convicted.
These are examples of misunderstanding:
- Mistaken identity: For example, the victim was sexually assaulted in a dark place and couldn’t clearly see the perpetrator’s face, leading to a misidentification.
- Lack of proof of non-consent: If consent cannot be clearly disproven, the suspect won’t be punished. However, if there isn’t enough evidence to prove that the accuser had malicious intent, the accuser won’t be punished either.
- Law not being consent-based (as in Korea’s past legal system): Even if the accuser didn’t want to have sex, if the other party didn’t use violence or threats, it wasn’t legally considered sexual assault — but still, the accuser wouldn’t be punished.
A conviction on this charge requires solid evidence that clearly implicates the accuser. Being not guilty of sexual assault & being not guilty of false accusation is super common. What’s actually rare is false accusers being punished.
It’s difficult to prove a sexual assault, but it’s even more difficult to prove a false accusation.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal)
Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
https://www.allkpop.com/article/2016/07/details-of-the-exchange-between-lee-jin-wook-and-the-woman-he-allegedly-assaulted-revealed
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent
Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
https://ichannela.com/news/main/news_detailPage.do?publishId=79436819-2
Keep deluding yourselves, haters with your mental illness of bullying.
FACT : Evidence Explicit of Active Consent (Non-Verbal)
Flirtatious conversation about clothing and reciprocal actions (hugging, kissing, physical contact). This meets the standard of active non-verbal consent under affirmative consent guidelines.
https://www.allkpop.com/article/2016/07/details-of-the-exchange-between-lee-jin-wook-and-the-woman-he-allegedly-assaulted-revealed
FACT : Explicit Verbal Consent
Miss A admitted saying ejaculate inside, "Today is safe" (not fertile). Police verified her cycle matches LJW's claim, proving active consent, contradicting her claim of staying silent out of fear.
https://ichannela.com/news/main/news_detailPage.do?publishId=79436819-2
Keep deluding yourselves, haters with your mental illness of bullying.