Actor Kim Seon-ho, who denied allegations of tax evasion and embezzlement, has taken "preemptive measures," such as returning the disputed family salaries and corporate card usage records. However, some view it as difficult to conclude that these measures have "completely cleared" him of tax evasion and embezzlement suspicions.
On the 4th, Kim Seon-ho's agency Fantagio issued an official statement and provided additional comments regarding a series of allegations related to the one-person corporation.
Fantagio said Kim Seon-ho established a corporation in January 2024 for acting activities and theater production, and that settlement payments for activities before a new contract with Fantagio began in February 2025 were paid to that corporation. It explained that Kim Seon-ho recognized that operating the corporation itself could be misleading, so the corporation stopped operations and there has been practically no activity through the corporation for more than a year.
It added that Fantagio and Kim Seon-ho have been directly paying settlement payments to the actor since the exclusive contract date in February 2025, and that as a preemptive measure to correct the previously uninformed corporation operations, Kim Seon-ho returned past corporate card usage records, family salaries, and the corporate vehicle. It said that in addition to the corporate tax already paid on amounts previously settled through the corporation, he has completed payment of personal income tax. The corporation is in the process of closing, and administrative procedures will be completed soon.
Earlier, since the 1st, Kim Seon-ho became embroiled in allegations of tax evasion and embezzlement. Reports emerged that he had created and operated a separate entertainment planning company at his home address, paid monthly salaries of several hundred thousand to several million won to his parents as corporate internal directors under the corporation's name, and then his parents transferred the salaries back to Kim Seon-ho. In addition, allegations arose that Kim Seon-ho's parents used the corporation-owned card to pay living and entertainment expenses, adding suspicions of embezzlement and breach of trust. Also, because the corporation shared the same address as Kim Seon-ho's residence, it was not free from suspicion of being effectively a paper company.
Fantagio said the past one-person corporation was established for theater production and theater-related activities and was never intended for deliberate tax avoidance or tax evasion, and that after transferring to Fantagio, actual business activity had not been conducted for about a year and the company is now undergoing closure procedures in accordance with relevant laws and procedures.
But controversy deepened when it was revealed that settlement payments for entertainment activities were received through the corporation while he was with his previous agency. If income had been recorded to Kim Seon-ho personally, personal income tax including local government tax could have been as high as 49.5 percent, but if handled as corporate income it would receive a corporate tax benefit of up to 19 percent, making it likely to be regarded as "income diversion." Fantagio said, "It is true that after establishing the corporation in January 2024, settlement payments from the previous agency were temporarily received," and the former agency said, "We only deposited the settlement payments to the place requested by the actor."
Despite Kim Seon-ho's explanation, suspicions surrounding his one-person corporation did not disappear. Ultimately, Kim Seon-ho called it a "preemptive measure," returned the disputed corporate card usage records, family salaries, and corporate vehicle, and paid additional personal income tax on amounts settled through the corporation in an effort to resolve the suspicions.
So does this "preemptive measure" mean Kim Seon-ho is completely free from the previously raised suspicions? In this regard, some in the legal community expressed somewhat negative views.
On the 3rd, attorney Im Jeong-yeop of law firm Jeonghyang told OSEN by phone that there are questions about whether such preemptive measures are sincere, and even if voluntary preemptive measures were taken, the matter has not been completely resolved. Attorney Im said, "For example, if personal income tax was paid, it is necessary to confirm whether the tax paid was the appropriate amount," adding, "I think the National Tax Service may take additional measures." Above all, if reports that Kim Seon-ho's parents "used the corporation-owned card to pay living and entertainment expenses" are true, returning the corporate card records later would not eliminate the charges.
Attorney Im Jeong-yeop said, "To use corporate funds there must be a corporate relevance, but the usage appears to be for personal living expenses. If it was not used for business purposes, that ultimately becomes embezzlement. This is a criminal matter rather than a tax issue, so there is a possibility of a future police investigation," and explained, "Even if there are signs of embezzlement and the corporate card usage records are returned later, there is no problem with establishing the crime of embezzlement. Later, if the charges are recognized and sentencing is considered, it could be applied as a mitigating factor."
He said, "If signs of tax evasion and embezzlement are true, preemptive measures will have no effect," and expressed the view that the series of steps of returning corporate card usage records, family salaries, and the corporate vehicle and paying personal income tax "only look like a confession."
Meanwhile, Fantagio said regarding the controversy, "Actor Kim Seon-ho deeply reflects on establishing and maintaining the corporation for about a year without sufficient understanding of corporate operations. We bow our heads and apologize," and added, "We also apologize for causing confusion and concern, and we will do our utmost to more closely manage the overall activities of our affiliated actors going forward."
Amid expert opinions like these, whether Kim Seon-ho's controversy is a legitimate tax evasion suspicion or a case combined by lack of understanding of one-person corporation operations and insufficient tax management is something to be watched through additional investigations or raised issues in the future.<
[Photo] OSEN DB
[OSEN]