Read on Twitter
rough trans of naver article; thread https://n.news.naver.com/entertain/article/416/0000259643
NCT Taeyong, a student informant of the school violence, said, "I doubt the sincerity of the apology..Keep your word."
[SBS funE l Kang Kyung-yoon] Group NCT member Taeyong made an official apology for revelations that he bullied his friends in the past. Still, some fans of NCT are protesting by issuing a statement calling for Taeyong to leave the group eight months after the revelation.
Taeyong's junior high school classmate A posted on the Internet in October last year that Taeyong had bullied his past friends. In response, Tae-yong reportedly apologized to the victim B, who had been harassing her body-related appearance on the Internet in the past, and+
+announced her official position in a press release, "There is no record of punishment, but I am sorry for hurting her in the past."
A, who reported at the time, strongly protested that Taeyong's vague apology was not sincere.
A said, "The unclear apology was that I lied to Taeyong' A said. It provided an excuse for the informant to be attacked with untrue content, such as "A is the main culprit of school violence," which caused mental damage, such as disclosure of personal information and malicious+
+comments."I insisted. The informant A revealed to SBS funE reporters all the recordings of about 50 minutes of conversations he had with the SM Entertainment lawyer alone after the meeting between Tae-yong and the victim B.
In fact, Tae-yong's lawyer said in the transcript, "If victim B makes additional comments on the implementation of the apology, he has to pay more than twice as much money again (in the amount of damage compensation)," and warned, "In order to take the memorandum written by B,+
+ A also has to write another 'no speech memorandum'." Regarding this, informant A emphasized, "Tae-yong and his victim's friend B wrote a memorandum at the level of 'mouthed' at the meeting, and even that was taken from SM Entertainment for both of them, so the victim B can no+
+ Regarding this, informant A emphasized, "Tae-yong and his victim's friend B wrote a memorandum at the level of 'mouthed' at the meeting, and even that was taken from SM Entertainment for both of them, so the victim B can no longer comment on it or ask them to fulfill his
+apology." Currently, the memorandum is reportedly kept by SM Entertainment's legal team. Taeyong's failure to fulfill his promise, which was claimed by informant A, was to donate to victims of school violence, conduct related volunteer work and show remorse.
A said, "We don't know if donations and volunteer work have been made, and we've only checked the home address and phone number of another victim who Tae-yong said he hurt himself during his school days as mentioned in the school violence report, but has yet to apologize," the +
+ lawyer admitted. In addition, I didn't implement it at all regarding the permanent deletion of Internet postings about my receiving malicious comments," he stressed. On the other hand, SM Entertainment countered that the informant's claim was different from the truth.
In particular, regarding the memorandum exchanged between Tae-yong and the victim B, he stressed that he did not take the memorandum unilaterally, saying, "Since the purpose of the memorandum was to check the compensation part and other matters provided by the lawyer at the+
+request of the victim, the lawyer who met the victim and the victim's mother explained the purpose of security reasons, and then drew up and received consent from the victim and kept only the lawyer."
Regarding donations and volunteer work, an SM Entertainment official said, "Taeyong has been making regular donations every month to organizations for students since September 2016, before meeting with the victims. I have been doing volunteer work such as visiting organizations+
+for underprivileged students and serving food.We refuted the claim made by the late informant A. Finally, regarding the permanent deletion of Internet postings, SM Entertainment said, "The informant is not the victim, but our lawyer faithfully took legal advice on the+
+informant's response to malicious comments on a moral level. In the process, the informant sent an estimate for permanent deletion of Internet postings, but he refused because it was not a fundamental solution to the problem of malicious comments and it was meaningless."The+
+lawyer has never agreed to implement the deletion of Internet postings related to informants," he added.
âend of threadâ
