There is such a thing as limits to freedom of expression

‌If we become a society where assassins are tolerated...
Can we just brush this off as cinematic fiction???
1. The May 18 movement was actually led by North Korean spies.
2. In the North Korean remittance case, Chung Mong-hun was murdered by the Kim Dae-jung administration.
3. Roh Moo-hyun's suicide was actually a homicide.
4. Ahn Hee-jung's rape case was orchestrated by Moon Jae-in.
Movies like these would be tolerated.
However, the reason such themes are not turned into movies or novels is that people know there are limits to freedom.
People also use this logic:
"It's fine to turn the Joseon Dynasty or past history into fiction, so why make a fuss about this?"
It is because the victims or their families of the incidents mentioned above still exist.
Therefore, when making modern period dramas, they adapt within the bounds of existing facts and, in particular, do not feature the families on screen.
That was the case with "12.12: The Day" and "The Man Standing Next."
However, "The Assassins" exaggerates non-existent parts for adaptation and, not being satisfied with just featuring families, goes as far as implying that the husband was involved in the crime that killed the family.
This has crossed the line significantly.
Freedom of expression??
Do you think Hollywood capital would recruit stars to make a movie in the US claiming that the 9/11 attacks were a staged event orchestrated by Bush Jr. to stabilize his administration???
Even though a long time has passed, if a movie were made in Germany claiming that Hitler was not evil but good, and that Germany was the victim, would that even be tolerated within Germany??
Simply put, regardless of political leaning, the movie "The Assassins" has crossed the line way too far.
I repeat, if we are supposed to view this just as a movie,
then can we really say "a movie is just a movie" even if the films mentioned above were released?