"Treated as a Criminal" vs "Manager Suspected First"... The Truth Game of Park Narae's Theft Incident

The truth battle between broadcaster Park Narae and her former managers is turning into a mudslinging fight. In particular, the 'home theft incident', identified as a decisive factor deepening the emotional rift between the two sides, is heating up the controversy as conflicting claims collide.

On the 13th, YouTube channel 'Entertainment President Lee Jin-ho' and others revisited the theft incident that occurred in April last year, which former managers of Park Narae felt was a core event of betrayal.

◆ The Trigger of the Incident: Missing Jewelry and Broken Trust

In April last year (2025), a theft incident occurred at Park Narae's home in Itaewon, valued at over 5.5 billion won, where jewelry worth tens of millions of won went missing. At the time, there were no signs of external intrusion, leading to the suspicion of two managers and one stylist who had access to the house.

The former managers claimed, "At that time, Park Narae's boyfriend took our names, addresses, and resident registration numbers, saying it was needed for 'writing a labor contract', but it turned out that this information was submitted to the police as suspect reference material," asserting, "We were treated as potential criminals and deceived." Ultimately, the real culprit was revealed to be a third party, not an insider, but the humiliation experienced during this process cannot be erased.

◆ Reversed Claims: "The Manager Suspected First"

However, a new claim raised that day turned the situation around. The person who first suggested the possibility of insider involvement was not Park Narae, but the former manager A who raised the issue. According to the counterclaim, A suspected a fellow stylist at the time and gathered opinions to actively cooperate with the police investigation through internal meetings.

Additionally, the collection of personal information was argued to be a legitimate procedure, not a "trap investigation." It was explained that since the employees wanted to process their income tax as freelancers at a rate of 3.3% instead of the four major insurances, securing personal information was essential for salary payments.

The real culprit was caught, but the theft incident resulted in lost trust. The manager's appeal of being "framed as a criminal" and the counterclaim that "the manager suspected first" are in a tense standoff, indicating that the situation may escalate into a legal dispute.