Its been revealed that Seungri has been forwarded to the prosecution on a total of seven charges.
The news was revealed on June 25, the Metropolitan/Provincial Special Detective Division of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency revealed to news outlets that he’s been forwarded to the prosecution on the following charges:
- Soliciting prostitution.
- Prostitution mediation.
- Occupational embezzlement of Burning Sun funds
- occupational embezzlement of attorney’s fees
- Violation of the food and sanitation act.
- attempting to destroy investigation evidence
- and distribution of illegal sexual content through social platforms.
Regarding the Soliciting prostitution part, the police say they’ve found several instances of Seungri mediating prostitution from December 2015 to January 2016.
Regarding embezzlement charges, the police investigation concluded that he had embezzled a total of 1.12 billion won (approximately $969,000).
According to Soompi, the police explained,
“Seungri and Yoo In Suk used a borrowed-name bank account managed by Madam Lin’s Korean assistant Ahn, pretended to hire a club MD (merchandiser), and embezzled 566 million won (approximately $490,000) as supposed pay for the MD. Seungri and Yoo In Suk also embezzled an additional 528 million won (approximately $457,000) of Burning Sun funds with the pretext of expenses for using the Monkey Museum brand. Seungri also embezzled 22 million won (approximately $19,000) of Monkey Museum funds with the pretext of personal attorney expenses.”
Regarding the violation of the Food Sanitation Act, it was attributed to the operation of Monkey Museum. In terms of the charges for sharing illegal sexual content in the kakaotalk chatroom, it was attributed to the chatroom conversations with Jung Joon Young and more.
He was also charged for instigating the members in the (chatroom, as reported previously by news outlets), when he had told them to change their phones.
Interestingly, the police have decided to not pursue the prostitution mediation suspicions brought earlier regarding his birthday party back in December of 2017. The police explained that considering the total expenses paid (being small) and the fact that a small part of the attendees were involved in sexual activities, it was not possible to view that as a solicitation of prostitution lawfully.
what do you think of this?