また、つい先日、同じくジョン・グクさんの自宅に、別の女性が地下駐車場に侵入し、現行犯逮捕されています。
参考リンク
この2件とも加害者は、ARMYさんか常軌を逸した愛情を持ったファンという事になっています。
実際この2件の加害者は、自分はARMYである、と警察に供述しているのでしょうね。
思うんですが。
この人達は、本当に恋焦がれ、正気を失っているんでしょうか？
行動理由で考えてみると、最初のグクさんの自宅のロックキーの暗証番号を何度も押していた加害者は、暗証番号が分からず、1番違いから全部の組み合わせを試していたのではないでしょうか。
（ex:自転車の番号ロックキー3桁を、111から112、113、とキーが開くまで試す行動）
そうだとすれば、十分正気ですよね？
2番目の加害者は、駐車場（おそらく地下）に入るまでに、門を乗り越え、地下駐車場の入り口のロックは、（おそらく）車からじゃないと解除出来ない防犯システムになっていると判断し、ロック解除を許可される車が駐車場に入るまでそこで待っていて、車が来たので一緒に中に入ったんですよね。
十分、正気です。
そして２人とも警察に訊かれたら、韓国に居る人やBTSを知っている人なら誰もが知るファンネーム・ARMYは自分だ、と答えているだけです。
この行動を男性女性を入れ替えて考えると、どう考えても、相手に危害を加えようとしている行動理由が見えてきます。
本当に愛ゆえ、なんでしょうか？
ストーキングも、憎悪の最初が愛情のもつれなだけであって、その行動は、歪んだ愛情の成就の為では無く、明らかに、相手への加害を目的としていますよね。
これは愛とは無関係に、相手に危害を加えようとしているだけです。
整理していくとそうなります。
私は、グクさんのこの2件とも、応援のやり方からはみ出さない「ARMYさんである資格」「ファンである資格」の話では無いと考えています。
現状、法律では住居侵入未遂と住居不法侵入となりますが、これは明らかに「殺害未遂」ではないでしょうか？
精神と肉体、それぞれ別個か一緒くたに、と考える、殺害目的、又は殺害に匹敵するダメージを与える目的を持っている行動です。
すると現在、ストーキング、本人の自覚が歪んでいるファンとしての愛情行動とされるものが、「愛だから」「好きだから」という理由を行動理由に置くことで、ただの殺害意図・執拗な暴行意図が、非常にeasyな認識にすり替えられてしまっているのが分かると思います。
明確な加害意志を持つ行動を、報道を受け取る側の私達、被害にあった本人、その周辺の人達、全員が、
加害者を、
誰もが通ってきた未熟な恋愛感情の記憶にしか居ない、美しく儚い、悪気の無い、思春期の幼稚だった人々に置き換え、
子供がやる事だから、その部分だけ未熟な人がやる事だから、と考えてしまう装置が、ストーカー、ファンの愛ゆえの行動という言葉に、最初から組み込まれているように思います。
違いますよね？
二人とも十分正気で、誰もが知るBTSのファンネームARMYを名乗っているだけです。
仮に本当に悪質さを持つBTSファンだとしても、日常的にグクさんやメンバーのプライバシーを踏みにじり、プライバシーを盗む行動を取り続けているのですから、
メンバーへの執拗な暴行意図で行動している以上、単にメンバーを精神的に殺し続ける意図を持った加害者ではないでしょうか？
有名人や芸能人をこの話の構造に当て嵌めていくと、やはり明確な殺害意志・執拗な暴行を与え続ける意志が、加害者側に明確に存在すると、切り出されます。
加害者当人に殺意があるかどうかを慎重に調べるのは、冤罪を防ぐ為に必要ですが、
加害者の行動理由そのものが、明らかに、殺害意志や身の危険を相手に強烈に撃ち込む意図を指している場合、
ここに恋愛や、自分が過去に通り過ぎた未熟な季節への感傷を前提に抱く考えを、即刻止めるべきだと、私は強く思います。
この２つの事件は、グクさんへの愛ゆえのトラブルでは無く、ここに出てくるARMYやファンという言葉を、暗殺者という言葉に仮に置き換えてみると、グクさんが命の危険を感じて当然の事件だと、伝わりやすいと思います。
ジョン・レノンを刺したあの男の人は、本当にファンだったんでしょうか？
20250905 10:50 文章を直しました。
"There is no such thing as harm done out of love. Today's Random Thoughts (Irregular)"
Today's post contains violent content, so if that bothers you, you don't have to read it.
Jump to your usual spot, or wait for my next post to feel elegant and uplifted.
I believe that even in the world of 2025, there still exists the underlying assumption that all obsessive behaviors stemming from stalkers or fans' admiration for stars and celebrities can be explained as, “Even so, wasn't this person's way of showing affection, however deranged, just their own form of love?”
I haven't verified whether the term “motivation for action” actually exists in psychology or psychiatry.
Today, I'll use “motivation” to mean that observing the action reveals the actor's intent.
“Because of love.” “Because I loved them.” “I loved them so much I acted strangely.” I believe there is a limit to this.
That limit is whether the other person feels physically threatened.
Reference Link
BTS Jungkook Stalked on Discharge Day... Chinese Woman in Her 30s Arrested for Attempting Home Intrusion
6/12 (Thu) 11:00 Delivery
Kstyle
Also, just recently, another woman broke into Jungkook's home, entering the underground parking lot, and was arrested in the act.
Reference Link
BTS Jungkook's Home Invaded by Woman in Her 40s... Warning Issued Over Malicious Acts: “I Saw Everything at Home” 2025/09/01 18:08 Kstyle
In both of these cases, the perpetrators are said to be ARMY members or fans with an obsessive, irrational affection.
In fact, the perpetrators in these two cases probably told the police they were ARMY members.
But I wonder.
Are these people truly so infatuated they've lost their sanity?
Considering their motives: the first perpetrator repeatedly entered the code for Guk's home lock. They likely didn't know the actual code and were trying every possible combination starting one digit off.
(ex:like trying a 3-digit bike lock from 111 to 112, 113, until it opens)
If that's the case, they're perfectly sane, right?
The second perpetrator determined that to enter the parking garage (likely underground), they had to climb over the gate. They judged that the lock at the underground parking entrance was a security system (probably) only unlockable from a car. So they waited there until a car permitted to unlock the gate entered the parking garage. When the car arrived, they entered together.
That's perfectly sane.
And when questioned by the police, both simply stated that they are ARMY, the fandom name known to anyone in Korea or familiar with BTS.
If you reverse the genders in this scenario, the motive for harming the other person becomes undeniably clear.
Is it truly love?
Even stalking often starts with tangled feelings of affection, but the actions themselves aren't about fulfilling twisted love—they clearly aim to harm the other person.
This has nothing to do with love; it's purely about causing harm.
That's how it breaks down.
I don't believe either of these two incidents involving Mr. Guk are about whether someone has the “qualifications to be an ARMY” or the “qualifications to be a fan” based on how they show support.
Legally, the current charges are attempted trespassing and unlawful entry, but isn't this clearly attempted murder?
It's an act driven by the intent to kill, or to inflict damage equivalent to killing, whether considering the mental and physical aspects separately or together.
This reveals how current perceptions of stalking—often dismissed as distorted expressions of fan affection—are being trivialized. By framing actions as “because of love” or “because I like them,” pure murderous intent or relentless assault intent is being replaced with an extremely easy justification.
A mechanism exists where all of us—those receiving the news, the victims themselves, and those around them—replace the perpetrator with someone who only exists in our memories of immature romantic feelings we've all gone through: beautiful, fleeting, innocent, adolescent, childish people.
We think, “It's just something kids do,” or “It's just something immature people do in that aspect.” and the phrase “actions born of fan love.”
That's not right, is it?
Both individuals are perfectly sane; they merely identify themselves using the widely recognized BTS fan name, ARMY.
Even if they were truly malicious BTS fans, since they persistently trample on Guk-san and the members' privacy and steal their privacy on a daily basis,
as long as they act with the intent of relentlessly assaulting the members, aren't they simply perpetrators with the intent to keep mentally killing the members?
Applying this narrative structure to celebrities and entertainers clearly reveals that the perpetrator possesses explicit intent to kill and persistently inflict harm.
Carefully investigating whether the perpetrator themselves harbors murderous intent is essential to prevent wrongful convictions.
When applying this narrative structure to celebrities and entertainers, it inevitably concludes that the perpetrator clearly possessed both a definite intent to kill and a persistent intent to inflict relentless violence.
While carefully investigating whether the perpetrator personally harbored murderous intent is necessary to prevent wrongful convictions,
when the perpetrator's motives themselves clearly indicate an intent to kill or to violently instill a sense of mortal danger in the victim,
I strongly believe we must immediately cease any assumptions based on romantic notions or sentimental nostalgia for our own past immature phases.
These two incidents were not troubles stemming from love for Guk-san. If we temporarily replace the terms “ARMY” and ‘fans’ appearing here with the word “assassin,” it becomes easier to convey that these were incidents where Guk-san would naturally feel his life was in danger.
Was that man who stabbed John Lennon truly a fan?
20250905 10:50 AM Revised the text.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
