YGYang Hyun Suk, BI (formeriKON) “Suspicion of covering up drug investigation”…Appellate court ruling today (8th)

The appeals court for YG Entertainment's general producer Yang Hyun Suk, who was put on trial for allegedly trying to cover up a drug investigation involving his singer BI (formeriKON), was handed down today.
be done. Today (the 8th), the Seoul High Court (Criminal Division 6-3) announced the appeal judgment for Yang Hyun Suk, who was charged with violating the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Specified Crimes (Threat of Retaliation, etc.)
Open the day. Yang Hyun Suk is accused of coercing and blackmailing Mr. A, who provided public information on BI's drug administration suspicions, by forcing him to change his statement.
In 2016, when Mr. A was arrested by the police on suspicion of taking drugs, he changed his statement and since then, through the National Rights and Interest Commission, Yang Hyun Suk
The public interest information was provided saying that there was external pressure. Although it is true that Yang Hyun Suk met and spoke with Mr. A, he seems to have made false statements such as saying, ``It's not my job to kill you alone in the entertainment industry.''
Mr. A's claims that he threatened or coerced him have been denied as impossible. The prosecution asked for a three-year prison sentence at the first trial, but the court ruled that ``in addition to inconsistent statements, there was no direct evidence.''
He was acquitted on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence that Yang Hyun Suk's words caused fear in the victim.
In September, the prosecution asked for the same three-year prison sentence as in the first trial, saying, ``Yang Hyun Suk used his social status to steal information.''
Overturning the statement of offer falls under the use of force," and added, "Through this, iKON has been active globally and has amassed enormous wealth, which has been passed on to Yang Hyun Suk, the de facto representative and largest shareholder."
He emphasized that the first trial's acquittal was a ``mistake of fact.'' It will be interesting to see what the appellate court's decision will be.