Shinhwa's Lee Min-woo reported experiencing facial paralysis symptoms.
On the 17th, Lee Min-woo posted a video on his social media showing him lying in bed with acupuncture needles on his face, along with the caption, "Nerves destroyed by stress."
Lee Min-woo added, "Facial paralysis symptoms. You need to treat the initial symptoms of Guillain-Barré syndrome within 72 hours of the golden time to be cured. If left untreated for several years, as in my case, full recovery is difficult, but with consistent treatment, it can improve."
Meanwhile, last December, according to the legal community, the Supreme Court's second division (Chief Justice Kim Sang-hwan) overturned the lower court's ruling that sentenced a broadcast writer, referred to as A, to nine years in prison and ordered the confiscation of over 2.6 billion won for violating the Act on Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (fraud) and the Lawyer's Act.
A is accused of swindling a total of 2.6 billion won over 26 months by deceiving others into believing that he could secure an acquittal for Lee Min-woo, who was reported to have been booked for sexually assaulting two women in June 2019, despite having no connections with the prosecutors.
In particular, A is reported to have approached Lee Min-woo again in December of the same year, after he was acquitted, demanding more money, saying, "Before the ten days needed to wrap up the case pass, the fact of the non-prosecution disposition must not be leaked, and you have caused an issue by being unable to stop the media report."
A is known to be a friend of Lee Min-woo's sister, and both the first and second trials found A guilty of the charges, sentencing him to nine years in prison and ordering the confiscation of 2,636,874,400 won.
However, the Supreme Court stated, "It misapprehended the legal principles regarding unlawful acts carried out post facto," and ordered a retrial of the case. The Supreme Court noted, "The lower court should have further examined whether the disputed transferred amount was a separate monetary sum, not the loan in this case, and whether the defendant's acts of transfer caused an increase in harm to the victim's legal interests or led to new infringements."
[Photo] SNS
[OSEN]