siOstrich6
와 진짜 충격이네요 뭐가 진실일지는 모르겠지만. 아이를 두고 이런 일을 벌이다니요
[All] A Complete Summary of Hongik University’s Park Sung-bum’s Explanation Statement! A Compilation of the Home Cam Incident, Full Blog Post, and Victim’s Claims
2026.04.27 09:09
Views 198Likes 1Scraps 0
The reason the controversy surrounding Hongik University student Park Sung-bum, recently known as the 'home cam tutoring incident,' has escalated again is
This is due to the lengthy explanation posted directly by the person involved.
 |
Presenting a completely different narrative from the existing claims of the victims' side
Key claims have been revealed that have caused a re-evaluation of the case itself.
In this post, I will summarize the main points of the claims based on the clarification statement.
1. Position following the first-instance ruling: “It is a suspended sentence, but I cannot accept it”
Mr. Park Seong-beom was sentenced to one year in prison suspended for two years in the first trial, but
They stated that they are proceeding with an appeal because they cannot accept the ruling itself.
In particular, while I partially admit to the physical contact itself, attempted rape, sexual assault, confinement, assault, etc.
He claimed that all of the multiple allegations were not true.
In other words, their position is that the core of the case is viewed not as "whether contact occurred," but as coercion and whether a crime was committed.
2. Claim of the incident started: “The victim approached and threatened first”
The most controversial part is the claim regarding the start of the incident.
Mr. Park Seong-beom claimed that the initial physical contact was initiated by the victim, not by him.
Afterwards, the victim was threatened with statements like "If you speak up, your life will be ruined," and continuous physical contact and demands
He explained that he continued.
In addition, claiming that a form of control and pressure followed, such as card usage, errands, and repetitive calling,
He emphasized that it was not a simple relationship, but a coerced situation.
3. Refutation of Home Cam Video: “Edited Video vs. Full Context Are Different”
The core of this clarification is the analysis of the home cam footage.
Mr. Park Seong-beom claims that the released video was edited to include only certain sections, citing the prosecution's investigation records.
I explained the overall flow separately. According to that, in the video, the victim first
It was revealed that the film includes scenes where physical contact continues, or where the hand is pulled again when contact stops.
He also explained that the behavior resembling fleeing was not an actual escape but rather a pattern of repeatedly stopping.
They argued that it is difficult to view this as a coercive situation.
4. Allegations of settlement money and recurring patterns, “Cases similar to the 100 million won demand”
The most strongly raised point in the clarification statement is the claim regarding the settlement money.
Mr. Park Seong-beom stated that the victim's side had previously filed a complaint against another private tutor in the same manner.
He claimed to have received a settlement of 100 million won. And he also claimed that the same amount had been given to him from the beginning of the case.
They stated that they continuously demanded settlement money.
In particular, claiming that there was a condition that a settlement would only proceed if all charges were admitted,
He explained that the case proceeded while refusing this.
This part is becoming the biggest point of contention because it is an argument that could change the very nature of the case.
5. Additional claims, including abusive environment, possibility of manipulation, and secondary harm
Mr. Park Seong-beom also mentioned the victim's family environment. In a bar setting, a minor
Claiming to have been exposed to drinking parties and outsiders, and that drinking and inappropriate situations were repeated
We raised emotional and environmental issues together.
In addition, regarding the second home cam video, it was also argued that the filming environment may have been intentionally set up.
Currently, as the controversy extends to the disclosure of personal information, harm to the family, stalking, and fundraising, it goes beyond the incident itself.
It was stated that the issue of secondary damage is spreading.
 |
6. Victim's Side Rebuts, Statement: “Video Evidence to be Released Soon”
 |
Following the release of the clarification statement, the victim's side also immediately stated their position.
The victim's mother's side stated via social media, "We will soon release written statements and video evidence refuting all parts,"
We have announced a direct rebuttal to Mr. Park Seong-beom's claims.
In addition, regarding claims concerning past settlements, he explained to the effect that “the situation at the time was carried out under coercion and intimidation,”
They strongly denied the interpretation that the motive was merely financial. In particular, emphasizing that there had been long-term threats and pressure,
They stated their position, saying, “If it were about money, we would have already reached an agreement and ended it.”
In this process, economic difficulties and family circumstances are also mentioned.
It was emphasized that the incident was not a simple dispute, but rather a continuation of ongoing damage.
FAQ
Q. Is Park Sung-bum claiming innocence?
Their position is that while physical contact was acknowledged, it was not sexual assault.
Q. Is it true that a settlement was demanded?
This information was raised based on the claims of the parties involved, and its veracity has not been confirmed.
Q. Is the home camera footage conclusive evidence?
It is key evidence, but the two sides differ significantly in their interpretation.
Q. Has the case been concluded?
The appeal is currently in progress, so the final ruling has not yet been issued.
Real-time popular posts
1
0
Comments 1