table of content table of content
Two significant legal developments have just marked the’Kim Soo-hyun case. While an initial ruling has become final in the disputes between him and several advertisers following the 2025 controversy, the criminal trial of Kim Se-ui, a representative of the Garo Sero Research Institute, entered a new phase on September 11. This first preliminary hearing gave rise, in particular, to a disagreement over his request to be tried in a trial involving citizen participation.
The first step forward concerns Mido, the Swiss watch brand that had terminated its advertising contract with Kim Soo-hyun after the controversy erupted in March 2025. Mido subsequently filed a lawsuit to recover approximately 577 million won corresponding to a portion of the amounts paid under the contract.
On August 27, however, the 13th Civil Division of the Seoul Eastern District Court rejected Mido's request in its entirety against Gold Medalist and the other defendants.
The brand still had time to file an appeal. Since that deadline expired on September 10 without any appeal being filed, The decision is now final..
A landmark ruling that marks a turning point in disputes with advertisers
This decision is of particular importance to Kim Soo-hyun since, according to the article in Dong-A Ilbo, from the the first final judgment among the pending cases concerning the return of advertising contracts.
Mido reportedly argued that, regardless of the actor’s personal responsibility in the controversy, the decline in his commercial value as a brand ambassador constituted sufficient grounds to terminate the contract.
Gold Medalist, on the other hand, argued that the controversy had been sparked by statements made by a third party and that Kim Soo-hyun had done nothing wrong that would justify holding him responsible for the breakup.
In the end, the court did not recognize the existence of grounds for terminating the contract and therefore dismissed Mido’s claim.
This decision comes on the heels of another significant development that occurred this summer. On July 29, the Seongdong Police Department had decided to not to forward the charges to the district attorney's office Charges against Kim Soo-hyun for violating the Child Protection Act and making false accusations were dropped due to insufficient evidence. In early September, the case files had been returned to the police after review by the district attorney’s office, with no request for a further investigation or for the case to be reopened.
At the same time, another proceeding is now underway in court: the one seeking to Kim Se-ui (the representative of the YouTube channel Garosero), who has made numerous public accusations against the actor.
Kim Se-ui's trial begins amid a dispute over a citizen jury
On September 11, the 26th Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court held the first pretrial hearing regarding Kim Se-ui’s trial. Kim, who is currently in custody, was not present, as his appearance is not required for this type of hearing.
His attorney confirmed in court that he was maintaining his request to be granted a trials involving citizen participation, a South Korean system that involves citizens in the judicial process.
Kim Soo-hyun’s attorneys asked the court to carefully consider this request. In particular, they cited remarks made by Kim Se-ui regarding his reasons for seeking such a trial, in which he reportedly portrayed his case as a fight against a vast left-wing political power and against South Korean prosecutors.
Kim Soo-hyun's attorney then stated: «We hope the court will consider whether this truly aligns with the purpose of a trial involving citizen participation, given that he continues to make such statements even while in custody.»
He also expressed a more specific concern: «We fear that the defense may seek to recreate in the trial the distorted atmosphere that surrounded this case in its early stages, or to use the trial for political purposes. We ask the court to reconsider the issue of a trial with citizen participation.»
Updated at 12:11 p.m.: Request to serve as a juror denied. According to judicial sources on September 11, the 26th Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court, presided over by Judge Lee Hyun-kyung, decided on that day to rule out the use of a citizen jury trial in the case against Kim Se-ui, who is charged, among other things, with violating the Act on the Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Networks and the Protection of Information, in connection with alleged acts of defamation. During the first preliminary hearing held that day, prior to the decision to reject the request, both the prosecution and Kim Soo-hyun’s representatives opposed holding a trial with citizen participation.
The prosecution argued, in particular, that it was necessary to take into account the risk of an invasion of privacy during the trial, as well as the fact that the case had already received extensive media coverage and that, as a result, potential jurors may have been exposed to distorted or biased information.
Kim Se-ui, for his part, denies all the charges brought against him.
Kim Se-ui's defense team denies the charges and maintains that he had a relationship with Kim Sae-ron
Beyond the debate over whether a trial with citizen participation will take place, this first preliminary hearing also provided a clearer picture of the defense strategy of Kim Se-ui, which denies all the charges brought against him.
The court first summarized the defense's position, noting that it argued that the facts presented by Kim Se-ui were true were not false. His lawyers also dispute that the photographs of Kim Soo-hyun released by the Garo Sero Research Institute are sexually humiliating.
The defense then presented its arguments regarding the defamation charges and the relationship that Kim Se-ui claims existed between Kim Soo-hyun and Kim Sae-ron.
«Regarding the defamation charge, the facts presented are not false. The deceased [Kim Sae-ron] had been in a relationship with the victim [Kim Soo-hyun] since she was a minor. There is also a note written by the victim before he enlisted in the military, KakaoTalk messages, and photographs and videos taken at the victim’s home,» her attorneys argued.
The defense also addressed the issue of the voice recording attributed to Kim Sae-ron, which the prosecution believes was manipulated using generative artificial intelligence.
According to Kim Se-ui's attorneys, «the National Forensic Service simply replied that it was difficult to reach a conclusion on the issue of the “deep voice” based solely on the information provided to it.».
They also argued that Kim Se-ui’s statements regarding the circumstances surrounding Kim Sae-ron’s death constituted an opinion rather than a statement of fact.
«The statements regarding the cause of the deceased’s death were merely the expression of an opinion. The defendant had confirmed with the deceased’s family that the documents provided to him were authentic; he was therefore unaware that they might be false,» stated the defense, adding that «the deceased’s mother stated that she was certain the voice on the recording was indeed that of her daughter.».
The defense also disputes that the photographs are of a sexual nature
Kim Se-ui's attorneys also rejected the allegations regarding the photographs of Kim Soo-hyun that were shown during the Gaseyeon broadcasts.
«[Kim Soo-hyun’s] photographs shown on the program do not constitute images likely to cause sexual humiliation. They are ordinary photographs of daily life taken by the deceased at her home. They did not specifically target any particular part of the body,» they argued.
At this stage, these statements constitute Kim Se-ui's defense argument, not the facts established by the court. The purpose of the first preliminary hearing was not to determine the truth of the various allegations at the heart of the case.
This initial hearing has therefore not yet ruled on the merits of these charges. It does, however, mark the beginning of a new phase in the legal proceedings, while the format of Kim Se-ui’s trial remains to be determined.
A case now being heard by three judges
The case had initially been assigned to the 14th Criminal Chamber with a Single Judge, before being transferred to the 26th Criminal Chamber (Collegial), presided over by Judge Lee Hyun-kyung and composed of three judges.
This type of referral allows a case that would normally be heard by a single judge to be assigned to a panel of judges, particularly in light of the nature of the case.
For Kim Soo-hyun, September 11 thus comes amid a legal context very different from that of spring 2025: while several legal proceedings remain pending, the dispute with Mido now marks the first final ruling in his favor among the cases related to advertising contracts. This marks another step forward alongside the resumption of his professional activities—notably with the Bench brand—as well as his return to events such as The Fact Music Awards on September 19.
