Broadcaster Park Su-hong, who was sued by the head of a food company over alleged threats amid a legal dispute about model fees, was recently cleared of charges.
On the 7th, Park Su-hong's legal representative said in an official statement that Park Su-hong, who was sued on suspicion of intimidation in July, received a "no charges (exonerated)" disposition.
That day, Park Su-hong's side said, "In July, person A of the food company sued Park Su-hong on suspicion of intimidation. At the time, Park Su-hong had not even received the complaint and learned of it through the media, so he did not know the exact details. Park Su-hong stated that he suspected a media play intended to damage his image," they said.
Park Su-hong's side said, "Afterward, Park Su-hong cooperated faithfully with the police investigation, and the Seoul Gangnam Police Station on Oct. 20 issued a non-prosecution decision, that is, concluding there were no charges, and notified Park Su-hong. It became clear that the allegation of threats against Park Su-hong was groundless."
Park Su-hong's side went on to say that person A's claim could not have stood from the beginning, saying, "At the time of the complaint, person A's claim was 'that they heard threatening words from Park Su-hong's former legal representative,'" and explained, "In other words, person A never heard such words directly from Park Su-hong, and there is no fact that Park Su-hong instructed his legal representative to make such remarks, yet the complaint was filed against Park Su-hong, who was not the actor."
Park Su-hong's side emphasized, "This can only be seen as an act to tarnish and pressure the image of the well-known entertainer Park Su-hong, and it is clearly a false accusation."
Park Su-hong's side also revealed that they are currently taking legal action against person A's company over model fee payments, saying, "Person A refused to accept the court's settlement order to pay part of the model fee to Park Su-hong, and suddenly raised this absurd issue two years later."
Finally, Park Su-hong's side added, "Since person A's claim was clearly revealed to be a groundless lie through the police investigation, we will firmly consider legal action against such acts that damage reputation in the future."
Meanwhile, in July person A filed a complaint with the Seoul Gangnam Police Station accusing Park Su-hong of intimidation, claiming that Lawyer B, who had served as Park Su-hong's legal representative, said to person A in June 2023, just before filing the lawsuit, "I'm sorry, I committed a sin worthy of death, please forgive me," and "You should kneel and say 'please save me' level" and similar remarks.
Regarding this, at the time Park Su-hong's legal representative rebutted, "Park Su-hong learned on the 29th through media reports that person A had sued him on suspicion of intimidation. He had not yet received the complaint, so he did not know the exact details, and he suspected that the widespread reporting was a media play intended to damage the celebrity's image."
Below is the full official statement from Park Su-hong's legal representative
Hello.
This is Taeha Law Firm, which is representing Park Su-hong legally.
Park Su-hong, who was sued on suspicion of intimidation in July, has received a "no charges" (exonerated) disposition. We deliver this official position regarding the matter.
1. In July, person A of the food company sued Park Su-hong on suspicion of intimidation. At the time, Park Su-hong had not even received the complaint and learned of it through the media, so he did not know the exact details. Park Su-hong said he suspected a media play intended to damage his image.
2. Afterwards, Park Su-hong cooperated faithfully with the police investigation, and the Seoul Gangnam Police Station on Oct. 20 issued a non-prosecution decision, that is, concluding there were no charges, and notified Park Su-hong. It became clear that the allegation of threats against Park Su-hong was 'groundless.'
3. This is an entirely natural outcome. Person A's claim could not have been established from the start. At the time of the complaint, person A's claim was "that they heard threatening words from Park Su-hong's former legal representative." In other words, 'person A never heard such words directly from Park Su-hong, and there is no fact that Park Su-hong instructed his legal representative to make such remarks, yet the complaint was filed against Park Su-hong, who was not the actor.' This can only be seen as an act to tarnish and pressure the image of the well-known entertainer Park Su-hong, and it is clearly a false accusation.
4. For reference, in September 2023 Park Su-hong filed a lawsuit seeking about 500 million won in contractual damages against person A's company for using Park Su-hong's face in advertisements without permission for more than a year, and that case is being heard at the Suwon District Court Seongnam Branch. Person A refused to accept the court's settlement order to 'pay part of the model fee to Park Su-hong' and suddenly raised this absurd issue two years later.
5. Since person A's claim was revealed through the police investigation to be a groundless lie, we will firmly consider legal action against such acts that damage reputation in the future.
[Photo] OSEN DB
[OSEN]