Kim Soo-hyun AI Transcript Case: Police Send Kim Se-ui to Prosecutors Over Alleged AI Audio Forgery

Police have sent Kim Se-ui, head of the Garosero Research Institute, to prosecutors while detained in a defamation case involving actor Kim Soo-hyun and an alleged AI-generated transcript. The case centers on claims that audio and related materials tied to the late Kim Sae-ron were fabricated using generative technology, a dispute now moving from police investigation to prosecution review. ¹

The current status follows a sequence of legal steps in late May and early June 2026. Seoul Gangnam Police Station concluded that Kim Se-ui was suspected of spreading false information about Kim Soo-hyun and also viewed him as suspected of damaging the actor’s reputation by manipulating the late Kim Sae-ron’s voice using AI. ¹

Kim Soo-hyun AI Transcript Allegation

The police finding placed AI Audio Forgery at the center of the case. Yonhap News reported that, after an investigation lasting about one year, Gangnam Police concluded that Kim Se-ui had manipulated an audio transcript using AI. ² The suspected fabrication was linked to broader allegations circulated online, including claims that Kim Soo-hyun had dated the late Kim Sae-ron when she was a minor. Prosecutors had earlier sought an arrest warrant for Kim Se-ui on allegations that he spread false information through YouTube and other channels, with a separate allegation that he used generative AI to fabricate the late Kim Sae-ron’s voice. ³

MBC reported on May 21 that police had determined KakaoTalk messages and voice files presented as supporting material for the alleged underage relationship were fabricated. The report said investigators identified the KakaoTalk counterpart not as Kim Soo-hyun but as an “unknown” account, and viewed the voice as having been created using AI. ⁴

The police also investigated motive. MBC reported that police did not view the dissemination of the disputed material as a public-interest issue, but instead pointed to a purpose of maximizing profit. ⁴ Yonhap later reported that police believed Kim Se-ui acted despite knowing the information was false and did so to attract public attention. ¹

Kim Se-ui has denied the allegations, MBC reported after his arrest. ⁵ The available source material does not include a full defense statement from Kim Se-ui beyond that reported denial.

Key Dates in the Case

The court’s stated reason for allowing detention was central to the early legal process. Yonhap reported that the Seoul Central District Court cited concern that Kim Se-ui could “destroy evidence and flee,” a short formulation that was also reflected in subsequent reporting on the detention review request. ²

Agency Response and Legal Status

Kim Soo-hyun’s agency, Gold Medalist, responded after police sent Kim Se-ui to prosecutors while detained and after disclosing a police investigation result notice. The agency said it was grateful to the investigative authorities that conducted the inquiry and established the truth, and to the judicial authorities for a fair and strict judgment. ⁶

The agency’s statement did not announce a separate new legal action in the provided material. Its public position, as reported, was tied to the arrest referral and the police investigation result notice.

The legal process had already included a detention challenge. Yonhap reported on June 1 that Kim Se-ui’s side requested a review of the legality of detention five days after his arrest, with a court hearing scheduled for June 2. ² The available source material does not state the final outcome of that review.

The case is therefore best understood in procedural terms: prosecutors requested an arrest warrant, the court issued it, police sent the detained suspect to prosecutors, and Kim Soo-hyun’s agency welcomed the investigative and judicial decisions. The central factual dispute described in the sources remains the alleged fabrication of digital materials, including AI-generated audio connected to the late Kim Sae-ron, and the alleged spread of false claims about Kim Soo-hyun.

The available reports show that the Kim Soo-hyun AI transcript case has moved beyond the police investigation stage and into prosecution handling, with the alleged AI Audio Forgery forming a major part of the defamation allegations. Further confirmed developments would depend on prosecutorial action or court proceedings after the June 4, 2026 referral.

작성자 소개

Cloi Lee

Author

모든 글 보기