Panorama

South Korean Football Association apologizes after sex scandal

The South Korean Football Association (KFA) has expressed regret following allegations of arranging sexual services for referees in 2011 and 2012.

9 August 2026Tagblick Newsdesk

Updated: 12 Aug 2026, 21:49AI-generatedWritten by an AI system, editorially responsible — how we work

Archive photo: South Korean Football Association apologizes after sex scandal — Archive photoPhoto: ypa.ir · Wikimedia Commons · CC BY 4.0

The South Korean Football Association (KFA) has apologized in response to allegations that emerged regarding the arrangement of sexual services for foreign referees. These practices reportedly took place during international matches in 2011 and 2012.

According to various media reports, including South Korean broadcaster JTBC, searches have been conducted at the offices of the football association in connection with these allegations. This scandal has prompted a public apology from the KFA.

The allegations suggest that the KFA was involved in providing 'services' to referees present for international matches held in South Korea. It remains unclear what specific actions were taken and who was directly involved.

The revelations were made public following an investigation and have led to widespread outrage both within and outside the sporting world. It is unknown whether the KFA will take further action against those involved.

The scandal casts a shadow over the integrity of South Korean football and the trust in the national football association. The KFA has indicated that it will fully cooperate with the investigation.

This item was written by an AI system on the basis of the headlines and short teasers of the independently operating newsrooms named below. We disclose this under Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Before publication we check origin and verifiability — anything that appears in only one place is not published — as well as language, substance and legally sensitive content. No separate substantive review of each individual item by a natural person takes place; we therefore do not rely on the exemption in Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of the AI Act. Editorial responsibility for this publication rests with the person named in the imprint (§ 18 Abs. 2 MStV). Please report errors to [email protected] — we will correct or remove the item. Full reports are available from the sources listed.