[KNS뉴스통신=황경진 기자] On the 16th, in the episode of MBC’s’PD Notebook-Our Twisted Heroes’, a broadcast about the controversial soccer player Ki Sung-yong due to the suspicion of’younger sexual violence’ was aired, and Ki Sung-yong’s side refuted the broadcast content. In addition, the legal representative of Ki Sung-yong released a file containing the upbringing of Mr. C and D, who claimed to be victims, and Mr. D, who claimed that the victim’s lawyer had engaged in a’scam’.
On the 17th, attorney Song Sang-yeop of Seopyeong, a legal representative of Ki Sung-yong, posted a statement on the 17th, saying, “The victim himself said it was a’public deception.’ Another wave is expected.”
Attorney Song Sang-yeop criticized the broadcasted’PD Notebook’ as “Yesterday’s broadcast provided a biased view of what’s true to the Americans with the tears of D, who is a victim.”
At the same time, he directly revealed D’s upbringing, saying, “I will let the people hear the testimony of D’s own upbringing as the victim and let the people judge the truth of this situation.”
In the upbringing file released by Song attorney, Mr. D said, “(After lawyer Park Ji-hoon on the victim’s side announces the case) we said,’Oh see. (Correction) write an article”I’m not Ki Sung-yong’. “If you do it, you can’t live in Korea because it becomes a scam to the public, so you can’t live in Korea.” Said.
According to this upbringing file, he admitted that the soccer player they designated as a rape perpetrator was not Ki Sung-yong.
In the transcript, Mr. D said, “Everything is a scam to the public,” and said, “I’m not going to move any further. Even if my name appears in the media, I’ll stay still. I’m a forgotten person anyway.”
Regarding this, attorney Song said, “D, the victim, is forgotten anyway after some time, and he even said that he had nothing to damage because no one remembered it,” and “this is the deception of the side to talk about in the lawsuit.”
At the same time, attorney Song said, “A legal action to inquire about legal responsibility against the other party will be brought within March 26.”
Meanwhile, attorney Park Ji-hoon (law firm Hyun), the legal representative of the victim who appeared in the’PD Notebook’, said, “I was forced to alternate (similar sexual activity) (from Ki Sung-yong and the perpetrator B). I remember.”
The following is the full text of Ki Sung-yong’s legal representative’s 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 directly
(Affixed testimony of development)
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 listen to the testimony of development.
(Affixed 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 disclose it immediately, but when Ki Sung-yong asked for “release it immediately”, he changed his words and suddenly said,’You have to file a lawsuit before revealing it to the court. ‘The people do not know that when a lawsuit is filed, the first, second, and third trials are aimed at the effect of prolonging the period of suspicion for Ki Sung-yong for a long time 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
Reporter Hwang Kyung-jin [email protected]
Copyright © KNS News & Communications Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited