Kim Soo Hyun’s Dating Scandal with Late Kim Sae Ron Heats Up as Nam Joo Hyuk’s Past ‘Minor Protection’ Talk with Kim Tae Ri Gets Fresh Attention Amid Controversy Over Age Differences in K-Dramas
A scene from the K-drama “Twenty-Five Twenty-One,” featuring Nam Joo Hyuk and Kim Tae Ri, has gained renewed attention. This happened amid the ongoing controversy surrounding Kim Soo Hyun’s alleged past relationship with Kim Sae Ron. The dialogue from the scene sparks discussions about age gaps, maturity, and the protection of minors.
The Resurfaced Scene
The clip from “Twenty-Five Twenty-One” shows Kim Tae Ri’s character, Na Hee Do, attempting to enter a nightclub using heavy makeup. She wants to experience the adult world despite being underage. Nam Joo Hyuk’s character, Baek Yi Jin, stops her and gives a lecture about the dangers of entering adult spaces before being ready.
Baek Yi Jin says to Na Hee Do,
“Do you know why the law protects minors? Because their imaginations are limited. Do you think things would’ve unfolded the way you imagined? Not a chance. Things you don’t need to experience, shouldn’t experience, that you’re better off not experiencing, happen. Because when people do something bad, the imagination of adults and the imagination of minors are worlds apart.”
This dialogue has become relevant due to the ongoing discussions about Kim Soo Hyun’s relationship timeline with Kim Sae Ron. Netizens believe the scene’s message aligns with the concerns raised in the current controversy. The debate centers on the responsibilities of adults when interacting with minors.
The clip’s message about the law’s protection of minors resonates with the Kim Soo Hyun and Kim Sae Ron situation. Many feel that Baek Yi Jin’s words emphasize that young people may not fully understand the consequences of entering the adult world too early. This connects to the concerns about whether Kim Sae Ron was too young for a relationship with an older celebrity.
Netizens view this scene as a commentary on the recent controversy. They believe that the dialogue serves as a reminder of the reasons behind laws that protect minors.
