Classmate Who Accused Nam Joo Hyuk Of Abuse At School Files Appeal Challenging Summary Judgment And Seeking Formal Trial

Classmate who accused Nam Joo Hyuk of abuse at school files appeal challenging summary judgment and seeking formal trial

A fellow student who asserted her victimhood at the hands of Nam Joo Hyuk has been penalized with a defamation fine in a summary order; nonetheless, she has initiated the process of a formal trial.

The request for a formal trial at the Uijeongbu District Court’s Goyang branch was confirmed by attorney No Jong-eon of Law Firm Existence on April 8th.

A fellow student of Nam Joo-hyuk’s from high school had told B, who works for an online media company, that she had been a victim of school violence perpetrated by Nam Joo-hyuk’s gang. In June 2022, B went on to publish an article claiming that A had been a victim of school violence at the hands of Nam Joo-hyuk. According to the report, “The informant had been a victim of school violence from Nam Joo-hyuk throughout six years of middle and high school, resulting in ongoing psychiatric treatment.”

Managers at Nam Joo-hyuk’s agency, SOOP, have taken legal action by suing B, the CEO, and A for libel, claiming, “We hope the swift investigation will clearly reveal the truth and restore Nam Joo-hyuk’s tarnished reputation.”

When the accusations first surfaced, A told the press that he had told B that Nam Joo-hyuk’s organization, not Nam Joo-hyuk personally, was to blame for the victimization, and that the piece had been misrepresented in publication, prompting a request for a correction.

The SOOP management team hired Sejong & Associates to represent them in a case they filed against A and B.

Due to the following: “A made a false report with the intention of slandering Nam Joo-hyuk to B, and B posted the article about Nam Joo-hyuk.” On March 28th, the Goyang Court fined A and B 7 million KRW (about $5,400 USD)each.

The court went on to say, “However, it was found that Nam Joo-hyuk had not engaged in school violence such as cutting in line or being a bread shuttle against A during his school years, nor had he bullied other friends by hanging out with so-called bullies,” which led to the conclusion that A and B conspired to publicly disclose false facts, defaming Nam Joo-hyuk.

There is evidence that A was first harmed by Nam Joo-hyuk’s associates, not Nam Joo-hyuk himself, according to Attorney No Jong-eon. All of this will be made clear when the trial begins. Additionally, he voiced his bewilderment at the assertion in the indictment that “Nam Joo-hyuk had not bullied other friends,” suggesting that this matter will also be addressed through witness testimony at trial.