Actor Kim Soo Hyun’s agency has released a new statement earlier than originally scheduled.
While Kim Soo Hyun’s agency GOLDMEDALIST had previously revealed that they would present a clear and substantiated position regarding the recent matter by next week, on the morning of March 14, they released an official statement.
In the statement, the agency claimed that while it is true that Kim Soo Hyun and the late Kim Sae Ron were in a relationship in the past, it did not take place during her minor years. They also denied allegations that Kim Soo Hyun’s agency pressured Kim Sae Ron to repay 700 million won (approximately $481,300) and included images as evidence.
Read the agency’s full statement below:
Hello, this is GOLDMEDALIST.
We are issuing a statement on behalf of Kim Soo Hyun regarding the recent reports by HoverLab Inc. (hereafter referred to as HoverLab). Previously, GOLDMEDALIST announced that we would release a statement next week based on verifiable evidence to refute the claims made by HoverLab.
However, early this morning, Kim Soo Hyun exhibited signs of severe psychological instability, and we have taken measures to ensure that he can achieve absolute stability. Following HoverLab’s report, Kim Soo Hyun has been experiencing extreme confusion due to claims that the cause of the sudden death of the deceased is attributed to him. Additionally, on the night of March 12, after HoverLab’s broadcast, a vehicle with individuals holding cameras was stationed across from the company’s main entrance and in the parking lot until dawn. On March 13, around lunchtime, individuals with cameras were seen loitering around the building, continuing the psychological pressure on Kim Soo Hyun.
Given these circumstances, we kindly ask for your understanding as we urgently release a statement to clarify the key issues. Although this deviates from our original plan, nothing takes precedence over this matter, and we felt it necessary to communicate even if there are shortcomings.
Thank you.
Explanation regarding the rumored relationship between Kim Soo Hyun and Kim Sae Ron
Kim Soo Hyun and Kim Sae Ron were in a relationship from the summer of 2019, after Kim Sae Ron became a legal adult, until the fall of 2020. It is not true that Kim Soo Hyun dated Kim Sae Ron when she was a minor. The photos shared by Kim Sae Ron on her Instagram Stories on March 24, 2024 and those shown in HoverLab’s broadcast on March 11, 2025 depict private moments of the two during their relationship in the winter of 2020. The outfit worn by Kim Sae Ron in those photos was released by a brand in June 2019, making HoverLab’s claim that the photos were taken in 2016, when Kim Sae Ron was a minor, impossible.
Furthermore, another photo released by HoverLab on March 12, 2025 was taken on Christmas Eve, December 24, 2019, and we have secured the metadata for this photo. The photo released on March 13 can also be confirmed to have been taken on the same day, as evidenced by the matching outfits. All the photos presented by HoverLab as evidence that Kim Soo Hyun dated Kim Sae Ron since her minor years were taken when she was an adult. The repeated claim by HoverLab that there are “photos taken in 2016” is unfounded, as the two were not in a relationship at that time.
The letters Kim Soo Hyun sent to Kim Sae Ron during his military service were among the letters sent to close acquaintances. As can be seen from the content, Kim Soo Hyun was adapting to military life and often wrote in detail about his daily life to his friends. Expressions of missing someone are common among soldiers and their close friends. However, HoverLab has claimed that the two were dating since 2015, distorting photos taken after Kim Sae Ron became an adult as if they were from her minor years and juxtaposing postcards sent after their relationship with letters from his military service to make ordinary letters appear as love letters. The nickname Kim Sae Ron publicly used on social media since 2016 has been misrepresented as a private term used only between the two.
There has been much criticism directed at Kim Soo Hyun regarding their relationship. While the relationship between two adults may be a private matter, it is natural for the life of Kim Soo Hyun, who is loved by many, to be subject to public evaluation, and if that evaluation is sharp criticism, it should be taken seriously and painfully. However, due to HoverLab’s reports, numerous false information and rumors are spreading as if they are truths even at this moment. The informant who appeared on HoverLab’s broadcast claimed to be a family member of Kim Sae Ron. However, according to a report from a media outlet, they are said to be an acquaintance of Kim Sae Ron’s mother. Distorted information based on a source whose identity is not even clear has led to the creation of rumors without any verification from the parties involved. The extremely private lives of the two have been forcibly exposed by others, causing immense pain not only to Kim Soo Hyun but also to those around both individuals. After their private lives were disclosed through HoverLab, the public’s various perspectives on Kim Soo Hyun’s choices are unavoidable. However, the past days of two adults dating and breaking up have been distorted by others, leading to the spread of countless lies even at this moment. It is incredibly painful for one person to endure such matters due to their private life. Additionally, it is an act of prying into the deceased’s private life and defaming their character.
Claims that Kim Soo Hyun ignored Kim Sae Ron’s financial issues are false
Due to HoverLab’s reports, Kim Soo Hyun has been portrayed as the devil who drove Kim Sae Ron to her death. HoverLab claims that Kim Soo Hyun’s agency GOLDMEDALIST pressured him to repay debts incurred from the deceased’s drunk driving accident, and that when Kim Sae Ron sought help, Kim Soo Hyun ignored her, leading to her extreme choice. However, this is not true. At that time, GOLDMEDALIST paid off the entire remaining debt that Kim Sae Ron could not handle.
GOLDMEDALIST worked with Kim Sae Ron to resolve various penalties related to her acting activities and compensation for merchants affected by the drunk driving incident after the accident. The total penalty amount due to the incident was approximately 1.014 billion won. During the process of determining the compensation amount, we made efforts to minimize Kim Sae Ron’s burden. Through her various efforts to repay the debt, the remaining compensation amount was reduced to about 700 million won. This process included repairing and selling Kim Sae Ron’s vehicle, which was severely damaged in the drunk driving accident, to compensate for some of the damages. This was done at Kim Sae Ron’s request, where GOLDMEDALIST repaired and sold the non-operational accident vehicle, compensating for part of the damages. The claim made by the informant who appeared on HoverLab that we seized Kim Sae Ron’s vehicle is a distortion of this situation.
(Penalty amount due to drunk driving incident)
Keds (Advertisement): 390,000,000 won
“Bloodhounds” (Drama): 700,000,000 won
Damaged Commercial Property: 24,361,852 won
Total: 1,114,361,852 won
However, despite her many efforts, Kim Sae Ron faced difficulties in her activities after the drunk driving incident and found it realistically challenging to repay the remaining amount. As a result, we determined that Kim Sae Ron was no longer able to repay her debt. Consequently, her debt was written off as a loss by us in December 2023. Our audit report dated April 1, 2024 confirms that we processed the entire claim against Kim Sae Ron as an uncollectible accounts expense.
In this process, we had to comply with the legal procedures between us and Kim Sae Ron. If we were to arbitrarily bear the penalties that Kim Sae Ron should have borne, it could lead to the establishment of a breach of trust against the executives who made that decision, and there was a risk that the costs would not be recognized as a company expense. If we lent money to Kim Sae Ron without interest or collateral without any procedures or documentation, it could be seen as providing illegal benefits to a specific individual.
Additionally, in early 2024, during the process of undergoing an accounting audit, we had to decide how to handle the claims against Kim Sae Ron. According to the advice from the law firm and accounting firm conducting the audit, if we processed the amount as an uncollectible accounts expense without any debt collection actions against Kim Sae Ron, it would be seen as us unilaterally forgiving her debt, resulting in a loss for us, which could also raise concerns about a breach of trust by our executives.
Therefore, we had to prove that Kim Sae Ron was in a state of “unrecoverable” debt, meaning she was unable to repay the amount at that time. Thus, it was necessary to confirm that we made efforts to secure our claims against Kim Sae Ron.
This is why we sent a notice to Kim Sae Ron. To proceed with the provision process for the uncollectible accounts expense, we needed to send a notice to prove that we were not arbitrarily waiving our claims against her. There was also a realistic concern that Kim Sae Ron might have to pay a gift tax corresponding to the benefits she would gain from the debt waiver. The message Kim Sae Ron sent to Kim Soo Hyun on March 19, 2024 was written in this context. We needed to follow the process to provision for the uncollectible accounts expense through the notice.
(Article 36 of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act raised as a concern by the accounting firm)
Therefore, the issue of Kim Sae Ron’s debt was entirely a matter between GOLDMEDALIST and Kim Sae Ron. The claims that Kim Soo Hyun personally lent money to Kim Sae Ron or suddenly sought to get it back are unfounded. Kim Soo Hyun has never lent money to Kim Sae Ron, nor has he urged repayment, nor was he in a position to do so.
At the time, Kim Sae Ron, who had left our company, lacked sufficient legal knowledge regarding her debt. Thus, she sent a message to Kim Soo Hyun and not her creditor. However, Kim Soo Hyun was completely unaware of the situation between our company and Kim Sae Ron. At that time, it had been about four years since the two broke up. Kim Soo Hyun inquired about the content of Kim Sae Ron’s message to our company, and we responded to him, “It seems there is a misunderstanding as the other party lacks accurate legal knowledge, so it would not be appropriate to respond to such matters without confirmation from an expert. The company will contact Kim Sae Ron’s agency with legal experts to resolve this amicably without misunderstandings.” We also explained the purpose of the notice we sent to Kim Sae Ron.
Subsequently, on March 26, 2024, Kim Sae Ron’s side expressed through her legal representative, “We would like to express our gratitude for the sincerity your company has shown to our client over the past period, and along with this, we wish to convey our intention to take responsibility for the damages your company has incurred. With the determination of the amount of damages the client is liable for, we hope to coordinate and adjust the future repayment plan through mutual agreement.” This brought the creditor-debtor relationship between GOLDMEDALIST and Kim Sae Ron to a conclusion, and after processing the entire claim against Kim Sae Ron as an uncollectible accounts expense, we have not demanded repayment even once.
Therefore, from Kim Sae Ron’s perspective, it can be seen that she understood she was completely free from her debt to GOLDMEDALIST. To link the cause of her death, which occurred a year later, to this is an unreasonable claim and excessively malicious speculation. GOLDMEDALIST understood the difficult circumstances of our former actress Kim Sae Ron and, while not seeking repayment of the loan, took care to prevent her from incurring gift tax as much as possible according to the law. Additionally, in the process of paying her penalties, we treated it as a loan with 0 percent interest and also set the late payment damages to 0 percent. It is only heartbreaking that this has been distorted as if we pressured her for repayment and that it has been maliciously portrayed as the cause of the deceased’s unfortunate decision a year later.
Who benefits from the unauthorized disclosure of private lives?
Photos taken when Kim Sae Ron was an adult have been misrepresented as photos from when she was 16. An acquaintance of the deceased’s mother has been falsely identified as an aunt. After presenting visually compelling but misleading evidence, the context and timeline are subtly altered, leading to the distortion of facts. A screenshot of a single text message in which the company was being considerate of the debt issue is being used to claim that the company pressured Kim Sae Ron to repay debts. As a result, even though the debt matter was resolved a year ago, this has led to the baseless assertion that the debt issue was the direct cause of the deceased’s recent passing.
In this process, Kim Soo Hyun has been dragged into being the scapegoat for the tragedy faced by the deceased. Context is removed, and a single distorted piece of evidence turns someone into a criminal, and because they are a criminal, everything becomes a target for condemnation. Following HoverLab’s reports, Kim Soo Hyun’s past actions are interpreted as if they were intended malevolence. Along with provocative images that unlawfully leak others’ private lives, claims that Kim Soo Hyun dated Kim Sae Ron when she was 16 are repeated. In this process, falsehoods become established facts, spreading through the internet and generating countless fake news. It is nearly impossible for the party being condemned to refute all of this, and even if they attempt to, it requires an enormous amount of time and effort to organize the vast amount of evidence and materials. In the meantime, the party suffers irreparable damage.
The photos of the two individuals released by HoverLab are indeed real. However, that does not make HoverLab’s claims the “truth.” By throwing out a few pieces of evidence that attract public attention and removing the context behind them, the truth is distorted, causing many to suffer. As mentioned earlier, we believe that the public’s perspective and criticism regarding the series of events involving Kim Soo Hyun should be accepted. However, Kim Soo Hyun, simply because he is a public figure, cannot just unconditionally accept numerous falsehoods and personal attacks. The reactions to Kim Soo Hyun’s private life that have been disclosed so far, or may be disclosed in the future, are something he must endure. However, we want to ask whether it is acceptable for the private matters of two adults to be disclosed without consent and whether he should have to endure all of this due to the non-consensual disclosure of private lives.
Source (1)
