Former managers deny joint extortion charges involving Park Na-rae

During a second hearing at the Seoul Western District Court on the 20th, former managers A and B denied joint extortion charges, claiming they were only requesting unpaid wages and severance pay. The two face accusations of demanding 250 million won, an amount representing 10% of the company's 2024 revenue.

Former managers involved in a legal battle with comedian Park Na-rae have denied joint extortion charges. They claim they were merely requesting legitimate amounts, including unpaid wages, owed to them after leaving their positions, and never intended to extort money by threatening Park Na-rae.

On the morning of the 20th, the Seoul Western District Court's Criminal Division 4 held the second hearing regarding charges of violating the Act on Punishment of Violence, etc. (joint extortion) against former managers A and B. The two are accused of demanding 250 million won, which represents 10% of the company's 2024 revenue. It is reported that the amount in question was not actually paid.

During the hearing, B denied the extortion charges, stating that they only requested amounts rightfully owed following the termination of their employment contracts. B maintained that there was no attempt to extort money by threatening Park Na-rae and denied conspiring with A. A legal dispute continues between the prosecution and the defense over whether a simple demand for money constitutes criminal extortion.

The court questioned B's claims to clarify the specific nature of the demands. When asked if it was true that they did not demand a certain percentage of company revenue but were instead claiming overdue wages or allowances, B replied in the affirmative. The nature and calculation basis of the demanded amount are expected to be key issues in future proceedings. However, the specific circumstances of the demands, the conversations between the parties at the time, and the basis for calculating the amount must still be verified during the trial.

A also denied the charges during the first hearing. A's side emphasized that they were merely exercising legitimate rights, such as severance pay, and had no intention to threaten or unfairly acquire money. Since the settlement of wages and severance pay claimed by the former managers must be legally distinguished from the joint extortion charges raised by the prosecution, the background of the monetary demands and the specific actions taken have emerged as core issues.

A also faces allegations of embezzling approximately 44 million won from Park Na-rae's company. The prosecution has reportedly added charges of occupational embezzlement and fraud through the use of computers, etc. In response, A countered that 24 million won of that amount was transferred with Park Na-rae's consent. A also claimed that evidence was illegally collected during the investigation. Whether there was consent for the transfer of funds and what the authority and purpose for using the funds were are expected to be addressed in court.

The conflict between Park Na-rae and the former managers escalated into a full-scale legal dispute in December last year. The former managers raised issues regarding workplace harassment and unpaid expenses. It is reported that A and B filed complaints alleging special injury, defamation by spreading false information, and violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation). The conflict expanded beyond criminal proceedings into labor-related issues through the filing of a petition with the Seoul Regional Office of Employment and Labor.

Park Na-rae has also taken legal action in response. By filing complaints against the two former managers for attempted extortion and occupational embezzlement at the Yongsan Police Station, the conflict has turned into a legal battle between the parties. While the former managers claim the monetary demands were legitimate, Park Na-rae's side has raised charges including attempted extortion. The allegations raised and the claims of the parties must be viewed separately from established facts.

The core of this trial lies in determining whether the amounts demanded by the former managers were legitimate claims for wages and severance pay, or whether the act of demanding money was done through threats. The embezzlement charges surrounding the transfer of company funds may also vary in judgment depending on whether there was consent from the parties and the circumstances of the fund usage. As both sides maintain their respective positions, attention is focused on how the court will judge the reality of the case based on evidence and testimony.

Read the original (Korean)