On March 31, actor Kim Soo-hyun held a 45-minute press conference at Stanford Hotel in Mapo, Seoul, to address a series of allegations surrounding his past relationship with the late Kim Sae-ron. These included suspicions of grooming during her minor years, emotional negligence, and alleged pressure over debt repayment.
In a statement filled with visible emotion, Kim denied dating Kim Sae-ron during her underage years, as well as the claim that she suffered due to his silence or his agency’s pressure. He emphasized that the two had dated in the past like ordinary people, later broke up, and lost contact.
He apologized for denying their relationship during the drama Queen of Tears, saying that he chose to protect the production team, the cast, and his public image over personal transparency. “If I could go back, I would make the same choice again,” he said tearfully.
Kim also claimed that the forensic messages presented by the bereaved family were manipulated and insisted that all claims should be examined by investigative authorities. His legal team has filed both civil and criminal lawsuits, including a ₩12 billion (~$9 million USD) damages claim, against those spreading defamation.
While the press conference was meant to clear the air, it instead deepened the divide in public opinion — both in Korea and overseas.
Korean Reactions: “The performance of a lifetime?”
Many Korean netizens criticized Kim Soo-hyun for lacking sincerity, calling his press conference overly dramatic and evasive.
Top Korean Comments (Source : Nate)
“Is he filming a drama right now?” (👍 2,427, 👎 184)
“His real personality is showing now.” (👍 2,328, 👎 200)
“Your image is already ruined. Just reveal the full truth.” (👍 2,086, 👎 143)
“He keeps talking about being a ‘star’… hmm.” (👍 276, 👎 18)
“Still lying. Don’t cover the sky with your palm. Bring evidence.” (👍 274, 👎 29)
“Not a single apology.” (👍 250, 👎 26)
“This is real… like the movie ‘Real’ he starred in.” (👍 250, 👎 14)
“Looks like he’s suing to squeeze out as much money as possible before penalty fees hit.” (👍 223, 👎 18)
Global Reactions: “Let the courts speak — not the media”
International users called for due process, focusing on evidence rather than emotions or media narratives.
Top Global Comment (Source : allkpop)
“He cried instead of standing firm. That’s not how an innocent person behaves. It looked like a plea for mercy.” (👍 36, 👎 8)
“If they can prove the messages were forged and win the case, he can come back. But if he loses… not good.” (👍 25)
“In Korean culture, calling someone ‘the deceased’ is respectful. People twist even respectful actions into insults if they hate you.” (👍 18)
“Why didn’t this article highlight the forensic evidence? It’s emotional bait to rile up the mob.” (👍 16, 👎 3)
“The police should’ve acted long ago instead of letting YouTubers play investigators.” (👍 15, 👎 1)
“Let the court decide. If he’s lying, he’ll be punished. If the family lied, same goes. The circus needs to end.” (👍 15)
“Stop talking. Submit all evidence. Don’t drag IU or Suzy into this.” (👍 11, 👎 1)
“That was a strong denial. It’s time for the courts to take over — as it should’ve been from the start.” (👍 9)
Analysis: Sympathy, Suspicion, and Legal Battles
The Korean public remains skeptical of Kim’s emotional delivery. Many believe the press conference was overly theatrical and noted the lack of a clear apology. Critics questioned his continued reference to himself as a “star” and the absence of Kim Sae-ron’s name, referring only to her as “the deceased.”
Global commenters, on the other hand, emphasized due process and fairness. While some criticized Kim’s emotional tone, most agreed that media sensationalism should not replace legal investigation. Several pointed out that cultural nuances, such as how the deceased are referred to in Korea, were being misinterpreted by international audiences and media alike.
This divide once again reveals a familiar pattern in K-entertainment controversies: Korean audiences focus on personal morality and emotional tone, while global audiences prioritize legal procedures and structural fairness.