The agency of actor Kim Soo-hyun refuted the claim that pressure was exerted by sending a second letter of formal notice regarding a 700 million won repayment to the late Kim Sae-ron.

On the 18th, the Gold Medalist issued an official statement saying, "We have not demanded any compensation for damages to the work from Ms. Kim Sae-ron anywhere. It is also impossible to claim damages by posting photos on social media or contacting the agency's actors," and clarified, "The reason we sent the second letter of formal notice was to provide Ms. Kim Sae-ron with a more accurate guide regarding the letter of formal notice."

The day before, the family of the late Kim Sae-ron filed a complaint with the Seoul Police Agency against YouTuber A, claiming the negative videos posted during her lifetime caused them distress and defamation. In this process, it was also claimed that after receiving the letter of formal notice regarding the 700 million won repayment, Kim Sae-ron sent messages to Kim Soo-hyun saying, "Please save me," and "Give me some time," right before the agency sent the second letter of formal notice, alleging it was a threat.

In response, the Gold Medalist released the full text of the letter of formal notice, emphasizing that "there has never been an imposition of debt repayment on Ms. Kim Sae-ron." The agency determined that Kim Sae-ron was unable to repay the debt and classified it as a loss in December 2023, stating that the second letter of formal notice was merely a simple legal procedural guide. The agency explained, "We informed Ms. Kim Sae-ron that 'the company sent the second letter of formal notice because if we do not collect the debt repayment due date from you, executives of the client company could potentially be guilty of breach of trust,' and expressed our willingness to negotiate proactively regarding the method and timing of debt repayment."

Regarding the claim from the family that the agency had blocked contact between Kim Sae-ron and other agency actors, they stated, "The content of the second letter of formal notice was aimed at advising not to discuss debt issues with individuals who lack legal authority, but to communicate with the responsible attorney," and added, "What was said to Kim Sae-ron regarding the communication with agency actors was to not ask other people from our company regarding this debt matter. In fact, Kim Sae-ron freely communicated with agency actors.

Furthermore, regarding the assertion that YouTuber A posted videos related to the deceased at the behest of the agency, they dismissed it by stating, "The Gold Medalist has no relation to A. The 'former manager of Kim Sae-ron' claimed by Gaseyeon is not affiliated with the Gold Medalist but rather an individual who worked with Ms. Kim Sae-ron at another company."

In addition, they denied the suspicions related to Seo Yea-ji, stating, "The claim that the Gold Medalist has defamed Seo Yea-ji is completely false," and regarding the spread of a photo of Kim Sae-ron standing with a man in her house, they said, "The person in the photo is not Kim Soo-hyun but another individual," and urged, "We ask you to stop attempts to tarnish Kim Soo-hyun's reputation based on unrelated photos and online posts."

Meanwhile, the family of the late Kim Sae-ron claimed on the 10th through the YouTube channel 'Gaseyeon' (hereinafter 'Gaseyeon') that Kim Sae-ron had been dating Kim Soo-hyun for six years since she was 15 years old, and alleged that despite experiencing financial difficulties due to her hiatus after the 2022 drunk driving accident, she was pressured to repay the 700 million won borrowed to settle the incident.

The agency refuted the claims as "false information," but after photos and letters showing the physical intimacy between the deceased and Kim Soo-hyun were made public, they clarified that "Kim Sae-ron was in a relationship from the summer of 2019 to the fall of 2020, after she became an adult." However, they explained that the reason for sending the letter of formal notice regarding the 700 million won repayment was that "if the company arbitrarily bears the penalty fee that Kim Sae-ron should bear, it could lead to potential charges of breach of trust against the executives who made that decision, and there were concerns that the related expenses would not be recognized as business losses for the company," emphasizing the need to secure their claim against Kim Sae-ron.

However, the legal representative of the family of the late Kim Sae-ron, attorney Bu-Yu from the law firm Bui, stated at a press conference held on the 17th that "After the agency sent the first letter of formal notice, Ms. Kim Sae-ron sent a text to Kim Soo-hyun saying, 'Please save me.' Kim Soo-hyun sent a response in the form of a second letter of formal notice. Briefly explaining the content of the second letter of formal notice, while it mentioned that 'we have no choice because it could constitute breach of trust as stated by the agency,' it was essentially saying that they would reduce the timeline and insisting that the debt must be repaid. It also contained threats regarding not directly contacting Kim Soo-hyun and the agency's actors and the legal action regarding the act of posting pictures."

She further stated, "After the second letter of formal notice, there has not been a single point of contact from Kim Soo-hyun, nor could she contact the other actors from the agency with whom she originally had contact. It is hard to imagine the psychological pain the deceased must have suffered upon receiving such notice. I don't understand why it is now that they are waiting for the family's contact through a public statement. They are currently considering legal action against Kim Soo-hyun's side."

Below is the full statement from the Gold Medalist.

Hello. This is Gold Medalist.
On March 17, the family of the late Kim Sae-ron held a press conference in collaboration with Gaseyeon and made claims regarding the issues raised at Gaseyeon's YouTube channel.

We would like to express our position on the second letter of formal notice.
The family claimed during the press conference that our letter of formal notice sent on March 25, 2024, contained the content that "the letter of formal notice stated that if they post pictures similar to those uploaded on March 24 on social media or contact any actor from the agency, they would be fully liable for damages if 'the queen of tears' suffered losses." Accordingly, we attach the original text of the letter of formal notice to this statement.

As confirmed through the letter of formal notice, we did not demand any compensation for damages to the work from Ms. Kim Sae-ron. It is also impossible to claim damages by posting photos on social media or contacting the agency's actors.

The reason we sent the second letter of formal notice was to provide Ms. Kim Sae-ron with a more accurate guide regarding the letter of formal notice. As stated in the previous statement, we sent a letter of formal notice to notify Ms. Kim Sae-ron that our claim is in a 'recoverable' state, to categorize the claim against Ms. Kim Sae-ron as a bad debt, and to eliminate any potential breach of trust issues for our executives. This is the first letter of formal notice sent on March 15, 2024.

However, as known, Ms. Kim Sae-ron sent a text to Kim Soo-hyun regarding this issue, and on March 24, she posted a photo of the two on social media. The letter of formal notice sent on March 25 was explained to alleviate Ms. Kim Sae-ron's concerns and emphasize the reason for urging debt repayment and our willingness to negotiate proactively regarding the method and timing of debt repayment. As explained in the attached second letter of formal notice, we informed Ms. Kim Sae-ron that "the company sent the second letter of formal notice because if we do not collect the debt repayment due date from you, executives of the client company could potentially be guilty of breach of trust," and stated that we were willing to negotiate proactively regarding the method and timing of debt repayment.

The family claims that the second letter of formal notice contains "the essence of pushing the deceased to reduce the period and repay the debt." However, as previously explained, the second letter of formal notice only contains that our company is willing to negotiate proactively regarding the method, timing, etc., of debt repayment, so it only requests Ms. Kim Sae-ron to inform her legal representatives of a possible schedule for debt repayment. There is no content urging debt repayment at all. The reason for including the request for Ms. Kim Sae-ron to inform her legal representatives of a possible schedule for debt repayment is that the purpose of the letter of formal notice itself is to prove that "despite urging for debt repayment, we have not been able to collect it," so it could not include a statement that "there is no need to repay the debt." If we were to express explicitly that Ms. Kim Sae-ron does not need to repay the debt, it would result in debt forgiveness, potentially leading to issues regarding gift tax for Ms. Kim Sae-ron.

In fact, on the day following the sending of the second letter of formal notice, March 26, our legal representatives communicated with Kim Sae-ron's management company to explain the purpose of the letter of formal notice. Subsequently, Ms. Kim Sae-ron stated through the second letter of formal notice, "I would like to express my gratitude for your previous consideration shown to the client and naturally take responsibility for the damages incurred by you; therefore, I would like to negotiate regarding the determination of the damage amount I should bear and the future repayment plan."

As stated in the previous statement, this concludes the creditor-debtor relationship between our agency and Kim Sae-ron. After that, we clarify once again that right after that (upon the submission of the audit report on April 1, 2024), we classified the entire claim against Ms. Kim Sae-ron as bad debt without any additional urging or negotiation. This indicates that our intention was never to pressure the late Kim Sae-ron to repay the debt, and neither the deceased nor the family has made any attempts to pay off the debt since then.

Furthermore, the creditor-debtor relationship between our agency and Kim Sae-ron is entirely a matter under our jurisdiction. Kim Soo-hyun has no authority to express a stance on this matter. Thus, we formally had to request through the letter of formal notice that contact with Kim Soo-hyun regarding "debt matters" should be refrained. We explained to Ms. Kim Sae-ron that "debt repayment is not the work of the company's employees or actors but is the jurisdiction of the client company" and advised her to refrain from contacting any employees or actors associated with the client company regarding this debt issue, and to communicate with the lawyers from our law firm who have been granted the authority to negotiate concerning the debt. There is certainly no content stating that if she contacts agency actors, she would have to pay damages. Nevertheless, Gaseyeon distorted the meaning by saying on March 17 that "not only Kim Soo-hyun but any member of Gold Medalist should not be contacted," while we have never made such a request to the agency actors and Ms. Kim Sae-ron continued to communicate freely with the agency actors afterward.

When Ms. Kim Sae-ron posted a photo on social media on March 24, Kim Soo-hyun was actively starring in 'the queen of tears.' As this situation unfolded, after Kim Sae-ron posted the photo, at least 50 articles poured in from 2:14 a.m., the moment she posted the photo, until around 11 a.m., when our official position was announced. Therefore, we found it necessary to inform Ms. Kim Sae-ron that such a sudden action could impact the production company, fellow actors and staff, broadcasting station, OTT and all concerned parties. We reiterate that we did not exert any pressure regarding damages to Ms. Kim Sae-ron.

Position regarding YouTuber Lee Jin-ho
Ms. Kim Sae-ron's contract with Gold Medalist expired in November 2022. Afterward, she was working with another entertainment company. The manager alleged by Gaseyeon to have a relationship with YouTuber Lee Jin-ho is an official of that company and not an employee of Gold Medalist. Nevertheless, Gaseyeon is distorting facts by cleverly utilizing statements like "Lee Jin-ho identified himself as a close friend and we are at the stage of assessing that he is the manager of Kim Soo-hyun's agency," to avoid legal responsibility.

Position regarding falsehoods about actor Seo Yea-ji
Gaseyeon claimed in its March 17 report that our agency conspired with media outlets to defame Seo Yea-ji based on anonymous informants. This was an absurd claim led by anonymous informants, which even had the former manager who was in charge of Seo Yea-ji at that time calling us in confusion. We ask you to stop spreading unfounded information without any basis or accountability.

The family requests to cease the continuous dissemination of false information.
Additionally, the family has made many false claims against Gold Medalist and Kim Soo-hyun. For example, the family claims that our agency did not attend the deceased's funeral. However, we visited the funeral home on February 17 and 19, 2025, personally met with the family to pay our respects and left a wreath and condolence money.

Gaseyeon referred to the informant who leaked Kim Soo-hyun’s private life as 'Kim Sae-ron’s aunt.' However, media reports have stated that the informant is not an aunt. During the press conference today, the family stated about the informant, "(the deceased's) mother does not have a married aunt. Above all, for Sae-ron, the aunt who recently interviewed her is more like a real mother than her own mom," and explained that they were 'more of an aunt than a biological aunt.' It is common knowledge that when identifying oneself as an 'aunt' in the media, it means a biological sibling of the mother. The difference between whether the informant is a relative or a close acquaintance can alter the public’s perception through the media. However, the family was ambiguous in stating at the press conference whether the informant is a real relative or a close acquaintance.

The most important thing regarding the informant is whether the information is factual and not who the informant is. Our agency is clearly aware of that. However, mentioning the informant's personal information is relevant because the family stated during the press conference that leaking photos of Kim Soo-hyun's personal life without consent was a 'very serious mistake.' The leaked photos, as revealed on past broadcasts featuring Kim Sae-ron, relate to a house Kim Sae-ron acquired after turning 18. They are not related to the claimed dating timeline by the family. Nevertheless, they have leaked Kim Soo-hyun's personal life under the justification of 'very serious mistakes.' Gaseyeon had repeatedly teased the release of these photos using sensational language. The family lists provocative reporting of Kim Sae-ron's personal life as one of the reasons why the deceased may have departed. I would like to question what the actions currently being taken by the family and Gaseyeon against Kim Soo-hyun entail.

Gaseyeon again claimed through its YouTube channel that based on a photo uploaded on June 23, 2017, from an SNS account created by a fan of Kim Sae-ron, Kim Soo-hyun was dating Kim Sae-ron during her minor years. However, the person in the photo is not Kim Soo-hyun but someone else. Gaseyeon claimed that the outfit worn by the person in the photo is similar to that of Kim Soo-hyun's past advertisement. However, the clothing in the photo is a product of a different brand from what Kim Soo-hyun has advertised.

When the photo posted on the fan account became a topic of discussion, claiming unfounded suspicions based on a photo that doesn’t even reveal the face seems unnecessary for us to respond to. However, the family has now raised new claims that based on this photo, Kim Soo-hyun frequently visited the apartment where Kim Sae-ron lived with her family during her underage years and had secret meetings when her family was not home. Kim Soo-hyun has never been to that place, which Gaseyeon directly points to as 'this elevator.' That place was visited by Gaseyeon, not by Kim Soo-hyun.

The family referenced that 'their aunt is more of a real aunt,' which led to the unauthorized disclosure of Kim Soo-hyun's private life. Yet, the claim that Kim Soo-hyun frequently visited Kim Sae-ron's family's home during her minor years and had secret meetings was not made previously. However, the family suddenly started making these claims when photos from the fan account became known. Please stop engaging in acts of misattributing unconnected lies based on a single photo or a post found online.

[Photo] OSEN DB, Gold Medalist

[OSEN]