Kitty-Cath 🫰🏻

Slay QUEEN!! parang katapusan mo na ah! Hahaha! Cutie!!! Saranghae! #KimJiwon

Well… 🖤🖤 #SooWon pa din sa 2026!

when Soo Hyun kisses Ji Won, there is no chance for others in this competition✍🏻

The language of love taken to another level. Just pure and simple caresses that make you believe in true love, again and again. Hearts for heart and soul by soul🩷🩷

Q: When was Hyunwoo the most adorable? Jiwon: With Yeongsuk. In the company’s rest lounge, Haein lies about a raccoon that lives there. Hyunwoo was so innocent & naively fell for Haein’s lies. #kimjiwon #kimsoohyun #soowon

Missing AAA 2024 soohyun 🤍

The inevitable 2 questions: if they're so certain the actor did everything they allege, and if they truly have clear and compelling evidence from the beginning, 1- why didn't they go directly to the police? 2 - Why use a criminal and agent of chaos to spread their supposed "truth"? ✅ 1. If the accusations were true, the correct course of action was to go to the police NOT YouTube. In South Korea, when there is:    • a relationship with a minor,    • grooming,    • emotional exploitation,    • abuse,    • or any sexual offense, the law requires that the report be made directly to: 👉 The police (Cyber ​​Investigation Unit) 👉 or the Prosecution Service NOT to:    • YouTubers,    • entertainment channels,    • tabloid media,    • anonymous forums. 📌 If her story were true, it would have been a serious crime. The correct course of action would have been to report it immediately. ✅ 2. A pro bono lawyer, even without charging a fee, would take it within 24 hours. In Korea, cases involving: • minors, • abuse, • celebrities, • potential civil liability, are extremely attractive to any pro bono lawyer. Why? ✔ media attention, ✔ social impact, ✔ ease of obtaining funding, ✔ protection of victims, ✔ ethical obligation. In other words: 👉 If a real case had existed, they would have had 20 lawyers knocking on their door. But no serious lawyer took the case. Why? Because none of the evidence met the minimum legal standards. ✅ 3. The family avoided the police because they knew the “evidence” wouldn’t withstand forensic analysis. This is the most important point: 🔥 Any falsified metadata, chat, or photo is immediately detected in a forensic lab. If the family truly believed in their screenshots, they would have gone to the police. But they didn’t because: • the chats are manipulated, • the dates don’t match, • there are reconstructed texts, • there are impossible linguistic errors, • there are edited files, • the metadata lacks a valid technical source, • the original devices don’t contain that data, • the experts can trace the changes. 📌 The police don’t forgive fake digital evidence. Going to the police would have meant: 👉 The manipulation would have been officially exposed. ✅ 4. The family's narrative depended on the media, not the truth. When one party has real evidence: • goes to the prosecutor, • files charges, • hands over the device. When one party only has a story: • goes to YouTubers, • creates tabular documents, • leaks incomplete images, • manipulates public opinion, • avoids institutions. This is typical of cases where: ➡️ The legal truth does not favor the family. ➡️ They need emotional support, not legal support. ✅ 5. Why didn't a lawyer take the case? Lawyers check three things before accepting a case: 1. Legally possible 2. Viable evidence 3. Credible client All three failed in this case: ❌ 1. Legally impossible The alleged facts do not meet the requirements for a crime without verifiable digital evidence. ❌ 2. The evidence is not viable Everything presented: • lacks real metadata, • has no source, • does not come from original phones, • is edited in Excel or a collage, • has incompatible timestamps, • does not pass authenticity checks. ❌ 3. Unreliable Client for a Professional Lawyer The family: • changed their story several times, • backtracked on their claims, • contradicted dates, • presented manipulated documents, • leaked chats without context, • posted material on YouTube, not to the prosecutor's office. No serious lawyer risks their license with that. @dianafigueroaoficial/post/DR6LS2tjCYF?xmt=AQF05uVLGtUgCsr4XleDeKvIidq9LHL4aDTbjHCcE64XH4a6aODOtH1FSVecJDZUvHFPOtwX&slof=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">threads.com/@dianafigueroa…

Winter ❄️ please bring us this peace ♥️ have a good weekend ☃️

[04/09 NEWS] “Lee Jin-ho raises suspicion that the late Kim Sae-ron lied → Releases video of her kissing another man in 2019.” On the 9th, Lee Jin-ho uploaded a video titled “Shocking Exclusive! The Truth About the Late Kim Sae-ron’s Ex-Boyfriend… The Reality of Kim Soo-hyun’s 6-Year Relationship!” to his YouTube channel “Entertainment President Lee Jin-ho.” In the video, regarding accusations that he was defending Kim Soo-hyun, Lee said, “That is absolutely not true,” adding, “If decisive evidence emerges that Kim Soo-hyun dated Kim Sae-ron while she was a minor, I believe he should bear all legal and moral responsibility.” ————— As supporting material, Lee Jin-ho released photos and videos of Kim Sae-ron engaging in skinship with the person she was allegedly dating at that time. He said, “The material I am releasing today is also a video showing Kim Sae-ron having skinship with her boyfriend somewhere between Seoul’s Nonhyeon Station and Eonju Station back in 2019. I seriously debated whether to release this. But without uncovering the truth of this matter, too many unfair situations and baseless speculations would continue, so I made the decision.” In the photos Lee Jin-ho released, a woman believed to be Kim Sae-ron is seen holding hands with a man while walking down the street. In another video, the two appear to be kissing. However, because the footage was filmed from a distance and is low in quality, it is impossible to clearly identify whether the woman is Kim Sae-ron. Regarding this, Lee Jin-ho explained, “A very close acquaintance was shocked after seeing Kim Sae-ron engaging in skinship and recorded it, and this material ended up being passed along to some people at her agency. Through this process, I was able to obtain it.” Lee Jin-ho also said, “The metadata of the video shows the date May 27, 2019. In other words, this material confirms that both Kim Soo-hyun and Kim Sae-ron had different partners they were seeing during the same period.” m.entertain.naver.com/home/article/2…

Love you Mami!!

Okay naman na ako at chill lang life ko kaya prayers na lang sa mahal ko sa buhay @KJ_Blitz @DaraWoman @itsmecathyyy P.S #SooWon and #BTS Amen 🙏

@KatieBTSSuga @KJ_Blitz @itsmecathyyy There's nothing wrong with hoping and praying. Libre naman mangarap. Hanggang may ilalaban pa, lalaban. 😂 For now, tapusin muna natin ang balakid na sinimulan ng ibang tao. Hahaha

2028 na ako mag post at sasabihin ko na blessed din ang fandom namin @KJ_Blitz @DaraWoman @itsmecathyyy Sa mga bashers pa bookmark muna ako balikan ko kayo sa 2028! Gusto ko sana earlier kaso mag Baeksang muna anteeeeeee ko si angkol back to being No.1 siyempre kaya both busy

Okayyy 💍. End of discussions 😆 Tapang mo, Jiwon! 💪😍

I've been missing them.. 💪💪💪

Our guess turned out to be absolutely right Uri Jiwon really did wear the Bvlgari Serpenti ring, the very same of Hong Haein's wedding ring! 💍🥰 Such a stunning and symbolic choice elegant, powerful, and full of meaning, just like her 💜

My Safe Haven 💜🧿

Woooooh we won!!! Dodgers!!

Tied up!! Go Dodgers!

It’s gonna be a lovely weekend and a bright November 😌😌

Can he teach her 👉🏻👈🏻