[ad_1]
|
|
Ki Sung-yong gave a press conference after the official opening match of the HanawonQ K League 1 2021 between Seoul and Jeonbuk held at the Jeonju World Cup Stadium on the 27th. This is the first time that Ki Sung-yong has played a direct public announcement about this case.
Ki Sung-yong said, “(The content of the suspicion) is irrelevant to me, and I never have,” and said, “I can never admit any arguments made by the self-proclaimed side of the victim.” He said: “If there is evidence, I hope to present it as soon as possible,” he said. “I can’t understand why I don’t talk about the tests and I don’t talk about them.”
Prior to this, Mr. C and D, who had been in the football club at an elementary school in Jeonnam on the 24th, claimed that they were sexually assaulted by their seniors A and B between January and June 2000, through the attorney Park Ji- hoon. They didn’t reveal their names directly, but it wasn’t hard to guess that Player A was Ki Sung-yong.
Lawyer Park Ji-hoon, representing the exhibitors, argued that “the C and D side has been putting pressure on them on the 26th” and said: “The content of Ki Sung-yong’s pressure and appropriation along with the evidence already insured will deliver the call recording file to Seoul and Ki Sung-yong. “
However, Ki Sung-yong said, “(The recording files, etc.) did not arrive.” “(Lawyer Park) said that after speaking with the ‘victims’ side, it was dispatched, but it hasn’t arrived yet. “If there is evidence, (C and D) can show it.”
Ki Sung-yong said, “There are many people who can testify (for me) about the situation at that time (accommodation in an elementary soccer club).” “I’m not sure what the purpose (C and D) was, but there is no mercy in the future. I will take all steps legally.”
The revelations of Ki Sung-Yong’s response to the super precipitation also caught fire. Lawyer Park Ji-hoon immediately said, “I will do whatever Ki Sung-yong wants. I will release all the evidence sooner or later.
As the positions of both parties are clear, it is expected that the debate will be at the center of the debate on how concretely the evidence that the developers will present is reliable. However, as it is not easy to present the physical evidence of what happened 20 years ago, it is highly probable that the specific testimony of C and D about the situation of damages at that time will be presented as evidence.
However, as it turns out that at least one of Ms. C and Mr. D was a perpetrator of school violence in high school, it is unclear how credible their testimony will be. The developers’ reluctance to reveal their faces and names is another part of the doubt.
