While the suspicion of FC Seoul’s sexual violence assault was raised once again through MBC’s’PD Notebook’ on the 16th, Ki Sung-yong’s side released some of D’s upbringing material, who appealed for the damage by saying, “Disclose evidence.
Song Sang-yeop, a lawyer at the law firm of Sung-Yong Ki, said in a statement on the 17th, “The’PD Notebook’ broadcasted on the 16th gave the people a biased view of what was true with the tears of D as a victim.” “For yesterday’s broadcast, we provided the fostering of D, who is a victim, but most of them are not broadcast, so we provide balanced judgment data to the public.” At the same time, he urged, “Do not look at the other’s attorney alone, but open it in front of the public right away,” he urged.
Earlier, the’PD’ notebook was broadcast under the title’Our Twisted Hero’, and the testimony of the victims of school violence informants of sports stars, including Ki Sung-yong, was revealed. Attorney Park Ji-hoon, who defended the victims of sexual violence in this broadcast, said, “Two perpetrators including Ki Sung-yong alternately raped the victims. They even remember the shape of the penis.” Victims also said that Sung-Yong Ki’s sexual violence continued in the camp, and said, “I thought it would be better to root out problems such as school violence even now.”
However, in the voice call file of victim D released by Ki Sung-yong, the contents of the broadcast and the argument are placed in front. In this file recording a call with Ki Sung-yong, D said, “I asked the attorney to publish an article that this disclosure was misleading, but if the attorney admitted to the misinformation in a situation where he had already disclosed his name, he could live in Korea. I refused, saying,’I don’t have it.’ At the same time, he stated, “It is also a novel that Ki Sung-yong’s side has been intimidated and threatened.”
Meanwhile, attorney Song also revealed the fostering of junior E, who mediated Ki Sung-yong and victims. E said, “As the victims are direct juniors of junior high school, they have no one side view with Ki Sung-yong. I said good things to hear from both sides for mediation, but rather, people who are victims used me.”
Currently, victims are demanding sue in court to conceal the truth. Ki Sung-yong said, “We will bring legal action to ask legal responsibility within 26 days.”
-The following is the full text of Ki Sung-yong’s official position.
Hi.
I am Song Sang-yeop attorney at Seopyeong Law Firm, the legal representative of Sung-Yong Ki.
Yesterday, an allegation to the effect that Ki Sung-yong raped male junior players when he was in elementary school was broadcasted. In the broadcast, D (hereinafter’the opponent’), who claimed to be a victim, showed tears, saying that he remembered Ki Sung-yong’s penis.
Yesterday’s broadcast gave the public a biased view of what is true with D’s tears as a victim. For yesterday’s broadcast, we provided the fostering of D, who was a victim, provided in this press release, but most of them were not broadcast, so we provide balanced judgment data to the public.
Through this, the public will directly hear the testimony of D’s own upbringing that he is the victim of exposing the truth while weeping on the broadcast, so that the public can judge the truth of this situation.
1. Regarding the nature of this incident, D, who is a victim, expressed himself as a’popular scam’.
D, who is a victim, said that when the report of this case went out, he asked his lawyer to correct him that he was a misinformation and not Ki Sung-yong.
Even D, who is a victim, says that his lawyer made a mistake in this case, saying,’You have to get rid of the shit you cheap.’
In other words, D’s statement that this case is the victim of his lawyer’s cheap shit. Let’s listen to the training directly (Attach the testimony of the development of D)
2. Whether or not D’s initial uncontaminated statement as the victim above was concerned, the other side has argued that there was a conviction and intimidation from Ki Sung-yong’s side.
However, D, who is a victim, testifies that there is no cause and threat from Ki Sung-yong’s side, even as a false claim to write a novel. Hear Victim D’s voice for yourself.
Through this, the public will be able to know the credibility of the other party’s official argument. (Affixed testimony of development)
3. Furthermore, D, who is a victim, even said that his attorney did not ask him for confirmation and consent, and that the case was leaked to the media at will.
It is difficult to believe in common sense that a lawyer distributes press releases to the media without the client’s confirmation and consent. We have reason to doubt whether we should believe D’s statement as such a victim. Let’s hear the testimony of nurturing in person (attached to the testimony of development)
This is a public inquiry.
Did the other party’s attorney report to the media without D’s consent and confirmation as the victim, as D’s claiming to be a victim?
If the other party’s attorney says that he has distributed the press release to the media with the confirmation and consent of the person he is representing (victim D), the statements of the victim D or the victim D’s attorneys are in conflict and one of the two Boone’s statement is not true.
With this answer, the public will be able to gauge the credibility of the claim that he is a victim.
4. The opponent asks Ki Sung-yong to never bet for defamation, as he will give information to him. (Affixed testimony of development)
Please think with common sense. If you’re really the victim, I’ll give you a false report, so why don’t you ejaculate like that so that you never bet on the perpetrator with defamation?
The wrongdoer quickly covered up the problem and corrected him to misrepresent the problem in order not to raise the problem, but he does not dare to raise the work on foot because of defamation. That’s D’s true intention that it was a victim who came out in an uncontaminated state at the beginning of the incident.
5. In the meantime, the other side has raised suspicion of sexual assault of Ki Sung-yong, and there is very solid evidence to prove this at first. He said,’I’ll reveal it right away’, then suddenly changed his words and said,’I can’t reveal the evidence. If Ki Sung-yong sues or sues, I will only disclose it to the court.’
They said they already had “convincing evidence” to reveal their arguments and said they would immediately disclose it, but when Ki Sung-yong asked for “immediate disclosure”, he changed his words and suddenly said, “You have to file a lawsuit to reveal it in court ‘The people do not know that if a lawsuit is filed, the first, second, and third trials are only aimed at prolonging the period of suspicion for Ki Sung-yong until the trial is finalized for several years.
Even D, who is a victim, is forgotten anyway after some time, and he even says that he has nothing to damage because no one remembers it. This is the intent of the party to talk about in the lawsuit. (Affixed testimony of development)
Therefore, we have urged the other party to disclose the truth by revealing it in front of the public, rather than seeing only the other party’s attorneys alone that will reveal the truth that the other party has.
When this incident was first reported on the broadcast yesterday, he had no one-sided awareness with Ki Sung-yong, and he did not know anything about the incident. The opponent quoted as though Ki Sung-yong admitted to his fault.
As a result, E, who is close to D’s junior high school direct junior, who is a victim, testifies that D, who is his senior, did not know how to use himself in this way. (D’s junior high school junior E, who is the victim)
D, who is a victim, already knows that his middle school junior E has made good words to hear about mediating in the middle.
So I know that I don’t have any one side view with Ki Sung-Yong, and E’s words, who know nothing about this case, are not evidence. (D’s upbringing testimony)
In this way, even though the other party knows that E’s words are not evidence, the other party should be criticized for presenting it as evidence.
6. In yesterday’s broadcast, the other party said that it would be presented in a’lawsuit’ while talking as if there was great additional evidence.
Ki Sung-yong is the one who will suffer the most if the “convincing evidence” claimed by the other side is true. Sung-Yong Ki wants to disclose the evidence, so there will be no legal obstacles to revealing it.
In addition, the other party is giving the reason that another person appears in the’Confirmation Evidence’. You can take protective measures (mosaic treatment, voice alteration, etc.) for the other person you want to protect and disclose it.
In some cases, the other side will disclose the evidence to the public to reveal the truth. If there is another reason for disability, please tell us anything.
We will remove all reasons that may be an obstacle when we disclose the evidence in front of the public that swears to the other person as’definite evidence’. The other side will not be ignoring the people’s intellectual abilities, so if the other side sees it, if it is’convincing evidence’, it will be’convincing evidence’ in the view of the people.
We avoid the opportunity to reveal the truth for one reason or another, and if time is not the purpose, we expect the other party to be responsible for revealing the truth by immediately revealing’convincing evidence’ that reveals the truth in front of the public.
Since you have raised a national suspicion, everyone who wants the truth now wants to disclose the evidence. However, I would like to tell the public that the only one who refuses to make a lawsuit without knowing when the evidence will be released will end.
7. Legal action to seek legal responsibility for the other party is raised on March 26, 2021.
March 17, 2021
Sung-Yong Ki’s legal representative
Song Sang-yeop, lawyer, Seopyeong Law Firm