[Sportschosun, Aram Park] Trot singer Suk Haeng, 47, whose real name is Han Sook-haeng, partially lost a lawsuit filed against her as an alleged affair partner and was ordered to pay 30 million won in damages. It has been reported that there was insufficient objective evidence to support her claim during the trial that she believed B’s marriage had already broken down.
On the 22nd, the channel Respect Lee Jin-ho released a video titled, 'Suk Haeng, Who Said She Was Fooled Too, Ultimately Ordered to Pay 30 Million Won... The Decisive Reason Revealed After Obtaining the Full Ruling.' In the video, Lee Jin-ho explained the key issues in the lawsuit involving Suk Haeng and B, a married man, based on the court’s ruling.
During the trial, Suk Haeng’s side requested that B, with whom she had been in a relationship, testify as a witness. They reportedly expected him to directly testify that he had told her his marriage was effectively over and that only the divorce process remained.
However, B refused to appear as a witness. Lee Jin-ho reported that B had a child who was a high school senior at the time and declined to testify because appearing in court could cause the child further emotional pain.
Lee Jin-ho said, "During the trial, Ms. Suk Haeng requested that her ex-boyfriend B testify as a witness. From Ms. Suk Haeng’s perspective, she naturally thought he would do it. But B has a child. In other words, as of last year, he had a child who was a senior in high school, so he refused to appear as a witness because he did not want to cause the child any further pain."
He continued, "In fact, this was a very urgent situation for Ms. Suk Haeng. Wouldn’t it have been more favorable for her if B himself had directly revealed that he had deceived her by pretending he was not married? It would have been clearer if B had explained why, how and for what reason he deceived her. From Ms. Suk Haeng’s perspective, however, she had been betrayed. In the end, he did not appear."
That does not mean B failed to respond to Suk Haeng’s claims in any way. According to Lee Jin-ho, instead of appearing in court himself, B submitted a written statement confirming that Suk Haeng had indeed been deceived by him about his marital status.
Lee Jin-ho stated, "It seems B found it difficult to simply watch Ms. Suk Haeng suffer. So although B ultimately could not appear as a witness, he wrote a statement confirming that Ms. Suk Haeng had indeed been deceived by him and submitted it."
However, the court reportedly found it difficult to accept Suk Haeng’s claims based solely on that statement. Objective evidence was needed to establish that the marriage had already effectively ended, but Suk Haeng’s side apparently failed to provide sufficient proof.
Lee Jin-ho said, "Even after reviewing this, the court said, 'We acknowledge that this is what you claim, but if things were as you say, wouldn’t there be evidence that would have led Ms. Suk Haeng to believe the marriage had already broken down?' There needed to be objective evidence, such as a claim that the marriage had already ended, that the couple had signed a divorce agreement, or that B no longer visited his wife and was paying child support, as confirmed through phone conversations. But there was not enough evidence for the court to make that determination."
He added, "The court’s position was, 'You are only making claims, and there is no evidence to substantiate them. How are we supposed to make a decision?' In the end, he did not appear."
Since Suk Haeng’s side had consistently maintained that she, too, had been deceived by B, his testimony was expected to play an important role in the trial. However, he ultimately did not testify in court. The written statement also appears to have been insufficient to support Suk Haeng’s claims.
The controversy surrounding Suk Haeng was first reported last December on JTBC’s Sageonbanjang. At the time, B’s wife, A, claimed that her husband had left home after having an affair with Suk Haeng. The controversy intensified after the program aired CCTV footage showing two people presumed to be B and Suk Haeng hugging and kissing.
As the controversy continued, Suk Haeng withdrew from the Maeil Broadcasting Network (MBN) variety show Current King of Singers 3, on which she had been appearing. At the time, Suk Haeng said she would clarify the facts through legal proceedings.
A later filed a lawsuit against Suk Haeng seeking 100 million won in damages. The court reportedly found Suk Haeng partially liable and ordered her to pay 30 million won.
Regarding the ruling, Lee Jin-ho analyzed, "Thirty million won in damages for an affair is quite a substantial amount. I understand that such awards are usually in the range of 10 million to 20 million won."
However, the scope of liability recognized by the court in this case reportedly did not mean that it accepted all of A’s claims or those made by Suk Haeng’s side. Although 100 million won had been sought, the court awarded 30 million won, meaning the full amount claimed was not granted.
Lee Jin-ho also released an interview with A and discussed how the lawsuit unfolded. A claimed that she learned about the relationship between her husband and Suk Haeng in January last year and continued asking Suk Haeng’s side to end the relationship. She said that when the situation did not change, she sent a certified letter in September warning that she would file a lawsuit.
According to A’s side, Suk Haeng’s representatives subsequently asked her to withdraw the lawsuit, citing issues involving penalties related to the programs Suk Haeng had appeared on. However, the two sides failed to narrow their differences, and the legal proceedings continued.
tokkig@sportschosun.com
This article has been translated by GripLabs Mingo AI.
