On March 18, 2025, Kim Soo-hyun's agency, Gold Medalist, made headlines by releasing a strong statement refuting various allegations surrounding the late actress Kim Sae-ron. These claims have emerged amid controversies involving both stars, with their reputations at stake.
The agency emphatically stated, "Kim Soo-hyun has never been to Kim Sae-ron's house," directly countering assertions made by the Garo Sero Institute. This institute had recently provided evidence purportedly showing Kim Soo-hyun alongside Kim Sae-ron watching television at her residence.
The conflict intensified with additional allegations from Kim Sae-ron's family, who claimed there were coercive practices surrounding her debts. Gold Medalist responded firmly, stating they had never demanded compensation from Kim Sae-ron and asserted, "We have never demanded compensation from Kim Sae-ron for damages related to works." They clarified the nature of their communications, asserting they have strictly dealt with the actor’s legal matters transparently.
These issues escalated positively with statements being shared across different media outlets. For example, Gold Medalist touched on Kim Sae-ron's financial troubles and explained, "The second content certification was simply a legal procedure" intended to negotiate the terms of repayment. The agency emphasized Kim Sae-ron's ability to communicate freely with fellow actors, intending to dismiss claims of her being restricted from contacting them.
On the other hand, the Garo Sero Institute also showcased text messages allegedly exchanged between Kim Sae-ron and Kim Soo-hyun, adding fuel to the fire. They were framed as conversations hinting at secretive communication. This was observed when they released contents on their YouTube platform, encouraging public speculation about the nature of their interactions. This move provoked Gold Medalist to question the motive behind these disclosures, implying potential defamation.
Kim Sae-ron's family, represented by attorney Bu Ji-seok, held press conferences where they detailed their grievances against Gold Medalist and others. Citing the need for clarity, they filed defamation complaints against YouTuber Lee Jin-ho, who they allege contributed to perpetuating false narratives about Kim Sae-ron’s relationships and circumstances leading up to her death.
The press conferences not only highlighted accusations against Gold Medalist but also parsed claims about Kim Soo-hyun's conduct. Kim Sae-ron’s family pointed out alleged designs to cover up the interactions they believed were damaging to their daughter’s image. They referred to textual exchanges where Kim Soo-hyun supposedly instructed Kim Sae-ron to use Telegram instead of KakaoTalk, insinuations of secrecy surrounding their relationship were emphasized.
Among the assertions presented, the agency presented photographic evidence aimed at denying allegations linking Kim Soo-hyun to Kim Sae-ron's family home. The spokesperson emphasized, “The photo shows neither Kim Soo-hyun nor the events described.” Instead, they clarified the atmosphere surrounding the images shared beforehand and stressed their intention to correct any misconception.
Gold Medalist attempted to broaden the discussion to include maintaining Kim Sae-ron's dignity and honoring her memory, emphasizing prevention of additional spurious claims against Kim Soo-hyun. They mentioned, "False claims are being made," underscoring their commitment to refuting misinformation alongside protecting their client.
With both sides holding strengths substantiated through public presentation, the fallout highlights the intersections between personal lives and public scrutiny. The mounting revelations raise questions of responsibility and accountability, promising to draw continued attention as the discussion evolves publicly and legally. The incident encapsulates the complex dynamics within the entertainment industry, especially surrounding reputational preservation.
The conflicts present challenges not only for Kim Soo-hyun and Gold Medalist but also reveal the broader societal commentary on celebrity culture and how it fuels public engagement. The case also reopens discussions on the responsibility of media agencies to uphold honorable narratives and minimize potential harm to individuals embroiled in controversies.
With the intricacies involved, both Kim Soo-hyun and the stakeholders surrounding Kim Sae-ron’s legacy remain embroiled in an uphill struggle where public perception intertwines with legal deliberations, ensuring all parties will keep facing scrutiny as the events continue to develop.
