Kim Se-ui, CEO of the online channel ‘Garo Sero Institute’ (Gaseyeon), has been arrested on charges of spreading false information and manipulating audio regarding actor Kim Soo-hyun. A practicing lawyer’s analysis of the reasons for his arrest and the possibility of a prison sentence is currently drawing significant attention.
On May 26, a video titled “Kim Se-ui’s Arrest Warrant Request, Even a Practicing Lawyer is Shocked by the Possibility of a Prison Sentence” was uploaded to the channel ‘Entertainment Behind-the-Scenes President Lee Jin-ho’. In the video, lawyer Lee Seung-jae provided an in-depth analysis of the legal issues behind the request for Kim Se-ui’s arrest warrant.
On the 27th, the Seoul Central District Court issued an arrest warrant for CEO Kim, who is facing charges including violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act, intimidation, and attempted coercion, stating there is a “risk of destroying evidence and fleeing.” Previously, the Gangnam Police Station applied for the warrant after a 16-month investigation into Gaseyeon’s claims that the late Kim Sae-ron’s cause of death was due to debt pressure from actor Kim Soo-hyun, and their continued false revelations that the two dated and had sexual relations as minors. The police determined these actions were extremely unusual and malicious.
In the video, lawyer Lee Seung-jae noted that it is very rare in the legal field for a pre-trial arrest warrant to be issued for defamation charges. Lee explained, “As damage from malicious slander via the internet by ‘cyber wreckers’ has become severe, investigative agencies and courts are viewing this more strictly.” Regarding the legal concept of “risk of flight,” which is often misunderstood by the public, Lee pointed out a hidden legal standard: “The practical criterion that judges use to determine the risk of flight is the possibility of a prison sentence.” This means a suspect is judged to be at risk of fleeing only when a prison sentence is expected in the future trial.
He added, “If the matter is likely to end in a fine or a suspended sentence, it is seen as having no reason to flee. However, if the charges are substantially proven and a ‘probability of going to prison (actual sentence)’ is likely, the risk of flight is judged to be high, and a warrant is issued.” In other words, the burden of issuing a warrant decreases when the judge is confident that a prison sentence will be handed down.
It was analyzed that the police strategy of highlighting the “charge of distributing recordings/photos taken using cameras under the Sexual Violence Punishment Act” in addition to defamation was effective. The prosecution also treated the case seriously, assigning it to the Women and Children’s Crime Investigation Division. While Gaseyeon claimed they used watermarks to cover the images, observers believe there is a very high possibility of a guilty verdict for the act of distributing underwear photos taken in a private setting.
Regarding the level of punishment, lawyer Lee evaluated, “If the nature of the defamation is extremely poor and combined with the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, a prison sentence of up to 10 years and 6 months is possible under the statutory penalty, and a prison sentence between 1 to 2 years is strongly expected upon actual sentencing.” He also added that if found guilty, the individual could be subject to personal information registration.
Before being arrested, CEO Kim Se-ui denied all charges, calling it a “nonsense warrant where the facts aren’t even sorted.” He reacted angrily, claiming the police pushed for a forced arrest by relying only on a private company’s manipulation appraisal, while the National Forensic Service had ruled the AI voice manipulation as “undeterminable.” However, he could not escape the court’s decision. This case, where the legal community applied a strict standard because indiscriminate revelations and the spread of false information online can destroy a person’s life, is expected to serve as a heavy warning to online media outlets that produce provocative exposure content.
Netizens reacted strongly, saying, “If an arrest warrant was issued for defamation, the nature of the crime must have been judged as truly terrible,” “I understand immediately after hearing the lawyer’s explanation that a high possibility of a prison sentence is seen as a risk of flight,” “If they even manipulated AI voices, it’s a truly serious crime,” and “He must be severely judged by the law.”
