[ad_1]
The teacher forgery scandal that he thought was over started all over again.
KBS’s Exploration and Press Department received a report that world-renowned master Lee U-Hwan’s forgery works are being re-marketed in galleries such as Gangnam and Insa-dong, Seoul. It is true? After 7 months of close coverage, reporters captured the scene where Lee Ufan’s suspicious job was traded. It traced the essence of the painting that the price was 800 million won and was bought directly from artist Lee U-Hwan with the introduction of a world-class architect.
Other suspicious works were also captured. One of them was an agreement reached by the president of the Unification Church, Choi, the “big hand” of the art market. The work was said to have been purchased from the Unification Church Foundation, but the Unification Church side denied it was unfounded. Eventually, President Choi was charged with fraud, but he was a character in the ‘Lee Ufan forgery’ case that heated up the Korean art world four years ago. In the counterfeiting investigation, it was confirmed that Korea’s largest gallery is trading 27 works by Lee Ufan, and the person designated as the owner of the painting was the ‘President of the Unification Church’.
The work of the Unification Church, where the reporters were able to confirm the origin of the suspicion with a single phone call, the galleries who claimed to be victims of having been deceived without knowing it, and Lee U-Hwan, who continued to argue that “my work is correct “in the courtyard where Wi Zak-beom confessed. At that time, the incident, 4 years passed, but the counterfeiting scandal did not end.
Reporters also reviewed the issue of duplicate numbers of works, which is at the core of the controversy over the Lee Ufan forgery. Transaction records for Lee Ufan’s works, including the world’s four largest auctions, two national auctions and exhibition catalogs, were thoroughly researched and analyzed. As a result, 80 papers were identified with duplicate numbers only among the data for which the number was disclosed. It was beyond the size of some accidental duplicates. Experts were concerned that “the scale of the counterfeiting may be beyond imagination.”
Now is the time to go back four years and ask questions. After all, whose responsibility is it?
The galleries that were at the center of the forgery complaints were not punished. The art world was silent. The artist’s silence also lengthens. The reporter asked writer Lee Woo-hwan directly.
Copyright © Special Times Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited
