South Korean Actress Nana and Mother Decline Witness Testimony as Home Invasion Robbery Trial Faces Procedural Delays

Nana and her mother declined to appear as witnesses in a robbery trial following a 2025 home invasion. The court has issued a new summons for April.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 25, 2026, 5:27 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Allkpop

Courtroom Absences Lead to Legal Stagnation

The judicial proceedings surrounding a high profile home invasion have encountered a significant hurdle in the Uijeongbu District Court. During a second hearing held on March 24, court officials noted the absence of the primary victims, the actress known as Nana and her mother. While the defendant and his legal representatives were in attendance, the victims were represented only by proxy, leading to a delay in the evidentiary phase of the trial. According to court records, the two women have submitted formal statements explaining their refusal to testify, citing a strong desire to avoid direct interaction with the man charged in the case.

Details of the November Home Invasion

The criminal charges stem from a violent encounter that took place in November 2025 at the actress's private residence. The defendant, a man in his 30s, is accused of trespassing and threatening both Nana and her mother with a weapon during an attempted robbery. According to police reports, the two women managed to subdue the intruder after a physical struggle before alerting local authorities. While the defendant has admitted to the initial act of trespassing, he has consistently denied a specific intent to commit robbery, claiming instead that the nature of the escalation has been misrepresented.

Dismissal of Counterclaims and Self Defense Ruling

In the months following the arrest, the defendant attempted to file a counterclaim against Nana, alleging that her actions during the struggle were excessive. However, authorities have already dismissed these assertions, officially ruling that the actress acted in self defense to protect herself and her parent. According to legal experts, this ruling reinforces the prosecution's narrative of the event, though the defendant’s legal team continues to challenge the robbery charge by questioning the specific intent behind the armed entry into the home.