Seoul, South Korea — In a recent livestream, Tzuyang, a prominent mukbang YouTuber with over 10 million subscribers, alleged that her ex-boy underwear’s lawyer illicitly provided private information about her to another YouTuber, who then attempted to financially extort her. Known for her video sessions of consuming large quantities of food, Tzuyang has become a significant online persona but finds herself embroiled in a controversy involving accusations of tax fraud and personal threats.
During the emotional broadcast, Tzuyang expressed her disbelief and disappointment at the betrayal, especially from a lawyer, traditionally a figure of trust. She explained that the lawyer, identified only by the surname Choi, leaked sensitive details to Lee Jun-hee, better known by his YouTube alias GooJeYeok. These details formed the basis of an exposé video crafted by Lee, claiming Tzuyang committed tax fraud by misusing her ex-boyfriend’s family’s names.
Tzuyang’s lawyer, Kim Tae-yeon, who was also present during the stream, categorically denied these accusations. Kim clarified that Tzuyang was unaware of the financial arrangements made in her name, emphasizing her client’s innocence and compliance with her then-boyfriend’s guidance on monetary matters.
Also unsettling was Lee’s threat to release more detrimental content about Tzuyang, ominously hinting it would be far worse than the tax fraud allegations. Amid these claims, Tzuyang bravely revealed her past ordeal with her ex-boyfriend, who not only managed her professional contracts but also allegedly subjected her to physical and mental abuse. He reportedly exploited her financially and sexually, accumulating more than 4 billion won (approximately $2.9 million) over their four-year relationship.
The controversy deepened when Tzuyang disclosed that the director of her agency and her video producer were coerced into a meeting with Lee last year. Under pressure, they signed an undisclosed contract and paid Lee 55 million won, aligning with his extortionate demands.
Further complicating the narrative, two days after the death of Tzuyang’s ex-boyfriend – the original source of the leaked information according to the legal complaint she filed – Choi approached Tzuyang’s corporate management team. He bizarrely requested that Tzuyang endorse his air freshener products on her channel, leveraging a will left by her ex-boyfriend as persuasion. Tzuyang, disturbed by Choi’s approach and wary of the incongruence with her channel’s content, ultimately declined.
Reflecting on the will’s contents, which were not publicly disclosed, Tzuyang played a recording during the livestream in which Choi tactlessly promotes his aspirations to become president and desires her to feature his products post-barbecue meals in her videos.
When Tzuyang resisted these inappropriate demands out of fear and discomfort with the content misalignment, she negotiated an alternative contract with Choi, stipulating a monthly payment of 1.63 million won, amounting to a total of approximately 23 million won paid.
On another legal front, Lee Jun-hee appeared voluntarily at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, refuting all allegations of blackmail. He claimed his actions were intended as a protective double agent role, preventing further information leaks about Tzuyan.
This complex saga intertwines allegations of betrayal, exploitation, and extortion, with significant impacts on the personal and professional lives involved, highlighting the vulnerabilities even high-profile individuals face in the digital age.