Former television personality Shin Jung-Hwan turned on an online fire storm after making a bold affirmation on a female celebrity presumably involved in a sexual corruption scandal.
Shin Jung-Hwan leaves bombs on bombs on the celebrities of the accusations of sexual corruption
The revelation came during the episode of April 21 of the nonnon YouTube talk show, which characterized a provocative round table entitled “The wildest round table still! (Feat. Power, celebrities and sexual corruption)”.
As he discussed the dark world of the sponsorships of celebrities and the alleged sexual favors, Shin told a disturbing meeting. He said he had heard a group of older acquaintances who openly discussing their involvement with the same female celebrity, each mentioning exact amounts of money, such as 5 million KRW and 10 million KRW, presumably paid for his company.
“At the beginning, I thought I was elusive”, Shin said. “But then I realized that they were talking about the same woman. Three different men, a name, shocked me.”
If pressed by the Kang Byung-Gyu co-conductor for the identity of the woman, Shin refused to spread any detail. “I can’t even tell the production team. It is difficult to speak because he was eating, drinks and playing golf with these businessmen who were clearly paying it,”, he said.
No name, only rumors: viral clip scares concern and speculation
The show of the show asked if the woman had ever been caught or publicly appointed. Shin replied that while there were existing items, an official exhibition had not occurred. Kang has added that in the past tabloid -style similar lists with names and alleged “prices” have emerged, further fueling the curiosity of the public.
Jang Hye -i, another panelist, expressed disbelief that the woman would have met more men from the same circle. Shin replied, “He probably has a general idea, but assumes that they won’t talk about it.”
Since then the segment has become viral, triggering rampant speculations between the online communities. Although names have not been mentioned, the nature of the statements has aroused concern for privacy, the reputational damage and the blurred lines between voices and public interest.
