Kara is missing from Tzuyang’s complaint? “Considering additional complaints”

\nJang Syang has been having a hard time in daily life since the public scrutiny\nSpecific lawsuits regarding Carla Culra are still pending… Considering additional lawsuits in the future\nStatements claiming malice, completely different from Jang Syang’s perspective\nRegarding the broadcasting on Jang Syang’s YouTube channel, nothing has been decided yet\n\n\nCyber Lek of YouTube’,

‘■ Broadcast: CBS Radio FM 98.1 (07:10~09:00)’, ‘■ Host: Anchor Kim Hyun-jung’, ‘■ Guests: Attorney Kim Tae-yeon (representative of Jang Syang), Professor Yoo Seung-hyun (Hanyang University’s School of Media and Communication)’, ‘It was last week. Jang Syang, a mukbang YouTuber with 10 million subscribers, goes live. She reveals her past as she confesses publicly. She reveals that her former boyfriend and agency CEO, Mr. A, physically assaulted and threatened her for over four years, even forcing her to pour drinks at an adult entertainment establishment and embezzling over 4 billion won from her through YouTube. She also mentions that when she reported him to the police, he committed suicide, ending the case.’, ‘Why did Jang Syang choose to publicly reveal her painful past that had already concluded? It turns out that YouTubers who learned about this past threatened Jang Syang. Their commonality was that they were YouTubers who created content focusing on social exposure and private sanctions. Jang Syang claims that they blackmailed her saying, “We won’t broadcast your past, so pay us money.” Yesterday, Jang Syang filed lawsuits against Kuge Eye, Carla Culra, and Jeon Guk-jin. Let’s delve into this case with Jang Syang’s legal representative and discuss whether it’s acceptable to leave these sanctioning YouTubers as they are with an expert. First, let’s connect with Attorney Kim Tae-yeon. Are you there, Attorney Kim?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Yes, hello.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> How is Jang Syang doing at the moment?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Since this case has been thrust into the public eye, she has been struggling significantly. In fact, things have become so difficult that it’s almost impossible for me to reach her directly, and she is having a hard time carrying out her daily life.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> It’s to the extent she can’t even lead a normal life. Considering that the public is now aware of several aspects all at once, it may be a bit confusing. So, Mr. A, the ex-boyfriend who committed those heinous acts, took his life while under investigation, thus bringing the case to a close. When did this happen exactly?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> It was around April 2023.’,

‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Around April 2023 or last April. However, even before the case was concluded, when did these so-called lekka YouTubers reach out to Jang Syang?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> They contacted her around February 2023.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> So, they reached out before the case was finalized?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Yes, that’s correct.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> It seems this is not recent. What did they say when reaching out? To her.’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> We will have to disclose the exact details as we make statements to the investigative agencies. Basically, the conversations that were made public on their YouTube channel were conducted in a manner very similar to the actual situations. They threatened to expose Jang Syang’s private life and extort money after contacting her.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Although it’s already been made public, as Carla Culra claims, the recorded calls known as the threat-mocking calls of Carla Culra and Kuget Eye, although Carla Culra denies it, let’s listen to a bit of their conversation.’, ‘⋆ YouTuber Carla Culra> We can’t do this forever.’, ‘⋆ YouTuber Kuget Eye> That’s right.’, ‘⋆ YouTuber Carla Culra> We’re not tormenting good people, innocent people for no reason. We got sponsorship from O and although we could receive criticism morally, it doesn’t mean we think this is a bad thing.’, ‘⋆ YouTuber Kuget Eye> That’s right. We’ve settled things with the victims.’, ‘⋆ YouTuber Carla Culra> Hang up and just do it.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Regarding these conversations, Attorney, you mentioned that there was indeed a demand for money back then.’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> It’s true that there was a demand for money. It was revealed that Carla Culra was also sued by us, but in this lawsuit, we did not specifically target Carla Culra. So, for now, the situation is that only Kuget Eye and Jeon Guk-jin are officially sued.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Is that so? The reports have been circulating since yesterday that all three individuals have been sued, but it seems Carla Culra has been excluded for now, is that what you’re saying?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> There are talks that many individuals may have been involved in the investigation process, so if it is revealed that more people were involved, we may consider additional lawsuits. However, for now, Carla Culra has been left out.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Is that because, as Carla Culra claims, she believes she was not involved and exclude herself? Or are there still doubts but she has been excluded for now?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> There are parts where doubts remain, but it has been confirmed that Carla Culra did not directly contact Jang Syang, so she was excluded for the time being.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> I see. In the case of Kuget Eye, he voluntarily appeared at the prosecutor’s office yesterday and made a statement saying that he was ready to cooperate fully with the investigation to protect himself from the threats of the largest undergraduate cartel in Korea. He also urged that the investigation on Jang Syang, who has become a victim of their opinion manipulation, be swiftly conducted to protect individuals who have no association with the cartel and regain a peaceful daily life.’, ‘So, in the case of Kuget Eye, he said yesterday that he did not threaten Jang Syang. Instead, he claimed that he had refrained other YouTubers from extorting money and tried to stop their exposure by providing sponsorship and preventing disclosure, saying that he has proof in the form of a contract. How do you know about this?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> From what I know, the actual factual circumstances appear to be quite different. Fundamentally, Kuget Eye asserts that there was no extortion or threats, and the reason we filed the lawsuit is because we believe there were threats or extortion involved. It seems there are discrepancies in the facts.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> But if there was a request to stop other YouTubers and prevent their exposure in exchange for money as Kuget Eye claimed, then isn’t this taken to the extreme?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> There was indeed a request for money. Earlier, it was revealed that Carla Culra was also sued by us, but in this lawsuit, we did not specifically target Carla Culra. So, currently, the situation is that only Kuget Eye and Jeon Guk-jin have been officially sued.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> That’s a lot to take in. Thank you, Attorney Kim, for your insights. This complex situation is also being viewed with suspicion by everyone. With the prosecution conducting investigations and even the prosecutor general mentioning the possibility of taking them into custody, we won’t know the truth until the results of the investigation are out. What I’m curious about now is Jang Syang’s perspective. In the meantime, are you aware if she will not be resuming YouTube broadcasts? How do you know about this?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Since it has been very challenging for me to have direct conversations with Jang Syang, discussing such matters has been difficult. It was quite urgent for us to proceed with the lawsuit, and it was also challenging for us to bring it up. Therefore, the lawsuit was a bit delayed. As for her broadcasting activities, no one is discussing it at the moment.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> So, as of now, no decision has been made. As she is going through a tough time, there are speculations that she might just quit YouTube or find another job.’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> There hasn’t been any decision made on that yet. As Jang Syang is going through a lot of difficulties, some people are assuming things, but there is no decision made regarding her broadcasting activities.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> I see. Do you have additional evidence to present?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Yes, we have additional evidence that has not been made public, and we intend to use that evidence to support our claims.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> You cannot disclose the additional evidence now, but according to you, Attorney, if you submit that additional evidence to the prosecution for investigation, will it help confirm the guilt of those individuals who have been sued?’, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> It’s difficult for me to definitively say it will confirm the guilt, but it doesn’t seem far-fetched to consider that there might be some extortion or threats, as suggested by Kuget Eye. ‘, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Understandable. Thank you for sharing your insights. ‘, ‘◆ Kim Tae-yeon> Thank you.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> We started with Attorney Kim Tae-yeon, representative of Jang Syang. All the YouTubers involved in this case have the common feature of producing contents focused on private sanctions. They target individuals who have committed wrongdoings for social justice and aim to expose and punish them. This concept has garnered them a substantial amount of sponsorships and increased subscribers. However, it turns out that if the allegations of blackmailing by extorting money are true, this is not a typical scenario.’, ‘Furthermore, aside from this case, there have been numerous larger and smaller issues involving these sanctioning YouTubers up until now. How should we perceive this? Let’s hear from the expert opinions. Let’s connect with Professor Yoo Seung-hyun from Hanyang University. Professor, are you there?’,

‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> Yes, hello.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Recently, various issues have arisen concerning the YouTubers who create content focused on private sanctions, even leading to various controversies. What are the characteristics of these YouTubers?’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> Generally, cyber lekka YouTubers are famous individuals who use negative incidents or social debates for their content to gain monetary profit. They shape such content under the guise of enforcing justice or private sanctions. Moreover, they have been transforming this content, highlighting private sanctions or justice, for commercial gain.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Because by emphasizing justice, they receive more public response.’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> That’s correct. They seek public reception and, more importantly, their primary goal is to generate financial profit. They create emotionally charged and sensational content to increase viewership and subscribers, ultimately aiming to achieve this. Therefore, these claims of justice and private sanctions are merely a facade, with the primary focus being on monetary gain.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Their aim is to unveil someone’s misconduct or delve into dark pasts. However, in doing so, often celebrities or prominent individuals are targeted. But since the legal system does not enable their accountability, they claim to want to bring retribution. In reality, though, this can sometimes result in innocent individuals being harmed, or personal matters being invaded, causing severe damage to their reputation.’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> Not only based on what we know so far, but even in everyday life on YouTube, we witness problematic scenarios. Therefore, beyond just these cyber lekka YouTubers, there have been cases of very contentious and potentially illegal content on YouTube that directly harm individuals at a personal level. To put it simply, fake news, misinformation, hate speech, discrimination content, reach such levels that cause direct harm to individual’s honor or infringement on one’s personal information and privacy, even violating personal dignity.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> In this case with Jang Syang, it goes a step further involving negotiations for money and attempts at extortion. Isn’t this critical?’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> It could be seen as extremely serious. Therefore, establishing alliances like the Cyber Lekka Association and collaborating to target specific individuals, even though Jang Syang is a famous YouTuber with influence, when you consider the impact they can have or the unlawful activities they can engage in, it’s evident that the current situations occurring on YouTube are more than just simple social controversies. It appears that they may have crossed a line.’,

‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> The distinctive feature of these YouTubers is they boldly declare during their YouTube broadcasts. They say, “I’m ready to be penalized. If you want to impose a fine, I’ll pay up,” speaking in such a manner. Considering that they may earn a larger profit even after being penalized.’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> It seems they have a good understanding of our current laws than we think. When creators upload content on YouTube, the YouTube platform allows a space for freedom of expression since it is perceived as an online space. Moreover, within the larger framework, the expressions are recognized.’, ‘Therefore, according to current laws, we can only penalize legal offenses such as defamation or insult. Although the Broadcasting Communications Commission can recommend corrective measures, it is merely a simple recommendation. If a recommendation is made, whether the YouTube platforms accept it or not is their decision. Thus, in reality, when such serious issues as those occurring among cyber lekka creators happen, they rarely face direct sanctions.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> Finding a solution isn’t easy, and you must have thought about this a lot, Professor. What kind of solution do you think would help to cleanse this atmosphere?’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> This issue is not only a concern in our society but seems to be one that the world as a whole is grappling with. Speaking specifically about Korea-‘, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> 30 seconds left.’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> First, platforms such as YouTube are overseas businesses. Due to being overseas entities, we cannot directly compel platform operators. Consequently, in the short term, it appears that these platforms recognizing their social obligations and bolstering their autonomous regulations would be the best course. Therefore, institutionalizing such aspects and especially creating a governance system in which users can participate, under the supervision and management of the government, where platform operators themselves strengthen their guidelines would be critical.’, ‘◇ Kim Hyun-jung> That’s all. Thank you, Professor Yoo Seung-hyun.’, ‘◆ Professor Yoo Seung-hyun> Thank you.’, ※ Please note that the interview content is from CBS .,

,