Nana Court Confrontation: Actor Testifies in Home Invasion Trial as Sentencing Date Is Set

Actor Nana appeared in court on April 21, 2026, for a direct legal confrontation with the defendant in the Nana home invasion case. The third hearing was held by Criminal Division 1 of the Namyangju Branch of the Uijeongbu District Court, where Nana and her mother testified as victim witnesses in the defendant A’s robbery injury trial.¹

The hearing focused on disputed facts surrounding the alleged home intrusion, including whether A possessed a weapon and whether the incident was a robbery attempt or a theft-related break-in. Nana and her mother maintained that a weapon was involved, while A denied robbery intent and weapon possession.²

Nana Faces Defendant in Court

Nana’s courtroom appearance marked a major point in the proceedings because she had previously been expected to attend as a victim witness after adjusting her schedule. OSEN reported on March 28, 2026, that her agency, Sublime, said she would appear at the April 21 hearing, stating that “she is correct to attend on April 21.”³

During the April 21 hearing, Nana directly addressed the defendant. Newsis reported that she said in court, “Look me straight in the eyes. Is this fun?”¹ She also testified about the emotional and personal impact of the case, saying, “I no longer think our home is safe.”¹

The court appearance came after earlier proceedings in which A denied key parts of the prosecution’s case. At the first hearing on January 20, 2026, the Uijeongbu District Court’s Namyangju Branch heard the prosecution’s position that A had entered Nana’s home, demanded valuables, and made threats. Sports Donga reported that Nana and her mother submitted injury diagnoses of 33 days and 31 days, respectively.⁴

A’s side argued that the purpose was simple theft, not robbery, and denied possessing a weapon. The same position remained central at the April 21 third hearing, where the presence or absence of a weapon was reported as a key issue.²

Disputed Weapon Claim and Self-Defense Finding

The case began after an incident at Nana’s home in Guri, Gyeonggi Province, on November 15, 2025. Sports Chosun reported that Guri Police Station had arrested and investigated a man in his 30s, identified as A, on suspicion of attempted special robbery after he allegedly entered Nana’s residence with a weapon and demanded money and valuables.⁵

Nana and her mother were reported to have subdued A after a physical struggle and then contacted police. Her agency, Sublime, acknowledged that the incident had occurred while saying specific details were still under investigation at that stage.⁵

The legal dispute later expanded when A, while in detention, filed a complaint against Nana accusing her of attempted murder and special injury. On January 16, 2026, Financial News, carrying a News1 report, said Guri Police Station decided not to forward the case against Nana, finding no charges. Police judged her actions to fall under self-defense after reviewing the circumstances and related materials.⁶

That police decision has become an important background fact in coverage of the trial, but it did not remove the central dispute in A’s robbery injury case. At the third hearing, A continued to deny that the incident was a robbery and continued to deny possessing a weapon, while Nana and her mother testified to the contrary.¹

Gyeonggi Ilbo reported that Nana rejected A’s claim in court as “groundless.”² The report also said the court planned to proceed with fingerprint appraisal results and questioning of a doctor witness before moving to sentencing.²

Sentencing Hearing Scheduled for June 4

The next major date in the case is June 4, 2026, when the court is scheduled to hold the sentencing hearing. Gyeonggi Ilbo reported that the court set that date after the third hearing, with the remaining process expected to include fingerprint-related findings and medical witness questioning.²

The charges and courtroom dispute have kept attention on the distinction between the prosecution’s case and the defense’s account. Prosecutors have treated the case as involving entry into the home, demands for valuables, threats, and resulting injuries. A has denied robbery purpose and weapon possession, describing the matter as related to simple theft.⁴

Nana’s April 21 testimony placed the victim’s account directly before the court. Her mother also appeared as a victim witness, reinforcing that the hearing was not limited to written statements or investigative records.¹

The case remains before the Namyangju Branch of the Uijeongbu District Court, and the available reports do not indicate that a verdict had been issued before the scheduled June 4 sentencing date. The confirmed record shows a home intrusion investigation in November 2025, a self-defense non-forwarding decision for Nana in January 2026, a first robbery injury hearing later that month, and the victim witness hearing on April 21, 2026.

In conclusion, Nana’s court confrontation with the defendant has narrowed public attention to the facts the court must resolve: the alleged robbery purpose, the disputed weapon claim, the injury evidence, and the prior self-defense finding involving Nana’s response during the home invasion incident.

작성자 소개

Cloi Lee

Author

모든 글 보기