Yes, I use ChatGPT to translate and polish my reviews in English. I write my reviews in my native language first, and the opinions are 100% mine. AI only helps with the English wording and grammar.
Journalism and Kim Se Ui don't belong in the same sentence. He was kicked out of MBC news and condemned by journalists…
Sorry if my comment gave the wrong impression. I am not defending anyone involved in this case, and I don't even know the person being discussed.
If the allegations were knowingly fabricated and spread despite evidence showing they were false, then I have no issue with legal consequences for deliberate defamation. Lying about someone, damaging their reputation, and profiting from false accusations is not something I support.
My comment was aimed at a broader concern about how defamation laws can sometimes be used by wealthy celebrities or powerful figures to intimidate critics, journalists, or ordinary people. That concern exists independently of whether the accused person in this specific case is guilty or innocent.
So my point was not "people should be free to lie." My point was that defamation laws should punish intentional falsehoods while also protecting legitimate criticism, reporting, and public discussion. Based on the statement you quoted, if the police can prove the suspect knowingly spread false information to defame someone, then that would be a completely different issue from someone expressing an opinion or raising concerns in good faith.
I must be reading you wrong. Are you defending the people that made up it up? you believe in freedom to lie cheat…
Sorry if my comment gave the wrong impression. I am not defending anyone involved in this case, and I don't even know the person being discussed.
If the allegations were knowingly fabricated and spread despite evidence showing they were false, then I have no issue with legal consequences for deliberate defamation. Lying about someone, damaging their reputation, and profiting from false accusations is not something I support.
My comment was aimed at a broader concern about how defamation laws can sometimes be used by wealthy celebrities or powerful figures to intimidate critics, journalists, or ordinary people. That concern exists independently of whether the accused person in this specific case is guilty or innocent.
So my point was not "people should be free to lie." My point was that defamation laws should punish intentional falsehoods while also protecting legitimate criticism, reporting, and public discussion. Based on the statement you quoted, if the police can prove the suspect knowingly spread false information to defame someone, then that would be a completely different issue from someone expressing an opinion or raising concerns in good faith.
""She's not biologically related.""He is in a younger body.""He isn't technically her…
"Only raised her" isn't the defense you think it is. If anything, it makes the situation worse. A parent-child relationship is defined by far more than biology. If you raise a child as your own daughter, change her diapers, teach her, protect her, and call yourself her father for years, then she is your daughter in every meaningful sense.
The "younger body" argument doesn't help either. His body may be younger, but his mind, memories, and identity are still those of the same older man. The soul and consciousness are the same. He's not suddenly a different person because he looks younger.
And when you say South Korea would never go that far, I have to disagree. Korean media has already explored incest and incest-adjacent themes many times. People keep bringing up the "they aren't biologically related" excuse, but that's exactly what it is—an excuse used to justify a relationship that would otherwise be viewed as unacceptable.
For example, *Oldboy* didn't even use the "not blood-related" loophole. It literally involved a biological father and daughter unknowingly entering into a sexual relationship. The entire point was to shock and horrify the audience. So it's simply not true that Korean media would never touch incest-related subjects.
My issue isn't limited to biological incest either. The "not biologically related" defense completely misses the point. If two people were raised as father and daughter, or as brother and sister, then suddenly turning that relationship into romance or sexual attraction is still disturbing to many viewers. The issue isn't just shared DNA—it's the family bond and the roles they occupied in each other's lives.
And this is exactly why I dislike these storylines. Real-life stepfathers, stepmothers, adoptive parents, foster parents, and guardians should be able to raise children without anyone questioning their motives. Most are loving parents who would never see their children as romantic or sexual prospects.
But when fiction keeps presenting "parent raises child and later becomes the love interest" as a romantic plot, it blurs a boundary that many people consider fundamental. A child should be able to trust that a parent figure is caring for them because they are family, not because they might someday become a romantic partner.
So no, "they're not biologically related" doesn't magically make it acceptable. If someone spent years acting as a parent, guardian, or sibling figure, many people will continue to see that relationship as fundamentally familial. The fact that there is no shared DNA doesn't erase the parent-child dynamic that already existed.
what disgusting message i stopped watching after episode 7
I find SML evil for playing victim card while he did what he did willingly Just because he wanted his father's money he become a obedient son, then goes on to blame everyone else not his greed.
Wow I have read your review and it made me realize that everything you have said are the actual reason why I cannot…
Everything becomes right if ML/FL are good looking Other wise it is suppressing, misogynist, and a loveless contract marriage But if leads look attractive then it's love
what was ending about that one guy get her ? but other guy also got her in his bed.... so both got her so what is point of choosing ML ? she can always go back and sleep with SML again.
The second male lead, I hated him the most. He sees she is involved with a guy he knows but he chooses to keep going after her which started this whole mess.
yes but end he just push her to that other guy(ML) so why was he after her if doesnt even have confident about making her fell in love with himself after he get her.
it can be edited and rating can be changed in future...
If the allegations were knowingly fabricated and spread despite evidence showing they were false, then I have no issue with legal consequences for deliberate defamation. Lying about someone, damaging their reputation, and profiting from false accusations is not something I support.
My comment was aimed at a broader concern about how defamation laws can sometimes be used by wealthy celebrities or powerful figures to intimidate critics, journalists, or ordinary people. That concern exists independently of whether the accused person in this specific case is guilty or innocent.
So my point was not "people should be free to lie." My point was that defamation laws should punish intentional falsehoods while also protecting legitimate criticism, reporting, and public discussion. Based on the statement you quoted, if the police can prove the suspect knowingly spread false information to defame someone, then that would be a completely different issue from someone expressing an opinion or raising concerns in good faith.
If the allegations were knowingly fabricated and spread despite evidence showing they were false, then I have no issue with legal consequences for deliberate defamation. Lying about someone, damaging their reputation, and profiting from false accusations is not something I support.
My comment was aimed at a broader concern about how defamation laws can sometimes be used by wealthy celebrities or powerful figures to intimidate critics, journalists, or ordinary people. That concern exists independently of whether the accused person in this specific case is guilty or innocent.
So my point was not "people should be free to lie." My point was that defamation laws should punish intentional falsehoods while also protecting legitimate criticism, reporting, and public discussion. Based on the statement you quoted, if the police can prove the suspect knowingly spread false information to defame someone, then that would be a completely different issue from someone expressing an opinion or raising concerns in good faith.
The "younger body" argument doesn't help either. His body may be younger, but his mind, memories, and identity are still those of the same older man. The soul and consciousness are the same. He's not suddenly a different person because he looks younger.
And when you say South Korea would never go that far, I have to disagree. Korean media has already explored incest and incest-adjacent themes many times. People keep bringing up the "they aren't biologically related" excuse, but that's exactly what it is—an excuse used to justify a relationship that would otherwise be viewed as unacceptable.
For example, *Oldboy* didn't even use the "not blood-related" loophole. It literally involved a biological father and daughter unknowingly entering into a sexual relationship. The entire point was to shock and horrify the audience. So it's simply not true that Korean media would never touch incest-related subjects.
My issue isn't limited to biological incest either. The "not biologically related" defense completely misses the point. If two people were raised as father and daughter, or as brother and sister, then suddenly turning that relationship into romance or sexual attraction is still disturbing to many viewers. The issue isn't just shared DNA—it's the family bond and the roles they occupied in each other's lives.
And this is exactly why I dislike these storylines. Real-life stepfathers, stepmothers, adoptive parents, foster parents, and guardians should be able to raise children without anyone questioning their motives. Most are loving parents who would never see their children as romantic or sexual prospects.
But when fiction keeps presenting "parent raises child and later becomes the love interest" as a romantic plot, it blurs a boundary that many people consider fundamental. A child should be able to trust that a parent figure is caring for them because they are family, not because they might someday become a romantic partner.
So no, "they're not biologically related" doesn't magically make it acceptable. If someone spent years acting as a parent, guardian, or sibling figure, many people will continue to see that relationship as fundamentally familial. The fact that there is no shared DNA doesn't erase the parent-child dynamic that already existed.
its same author so they are making two dramas from same story
Just because he wanted his father's money he become a obedient son, then goes on to blame everyone else not his greed.
If they hasn't put SML in to much
And then become disgusting message at end of the show
You end up hating all the character you like at starting.
Spineless man Spotted
Law and rules only apply to other characters
Other wise it is suppressing, misogynist, and a loveless contract marriage
But if leads look attractive then it's love
but other guy also got her in his bed.... so both got her so what is point of choosing ML ?
she can always go back and sleep with SML again.
yes but end he just push her to that other guy(ML)
so why was he after her if doesnt even have confident about making her fell in love with himself after he get her.