The reason why Park We is receiving this much backlash

Criticism regarding the exposure of a private citizen's identity and attempts to induce private sanctions through "public shaming" (exposure posts).
The criticism is that, using the influence of a channel with 1 million subscribers, there was a lack of consideration for an individual who could become a target of cyberbullying due to the disclosure of their workplace, physical characteristics (such as body type), and identity. Although the low-resolution CCTV does not fully reveal the face, the facial contours were visible because proper mosaic blurring was not applied except for the opening scene, and it is not difficult to identify the individual as it can be seen to be Daejeon Station via the station nameplate on the pillar. On the other hand, the worker exposed in the video has virtually no means to clarify the facts. In particular, social service agents are in a position where it is difficult to publicly state their position or refute matters occurring during duty due to the obligation to maintain dignity under the Military Service Act and service management regulations. Points are being raised that "public shaming" by putting an opponent—whose right to rebuttal has been blocked—before the public is closer to a witch hunt than a public interest whistleblowing. Ultimately, this means that the risk of exposing someone's identity and threatening their social life was consumed as material to drive traffic and topicality for his own channel. Moral blind spots are being pointed out in that even someone's fatal mistake and a terrifying safety accident were converted into commercial items.
Furthermore, while uploading a video with the nature of private sanction, adding the remark "Please refrain from criticizing the individual" is being criticized as a contradictory attitude—creating a situation where an attack from the fandom is clearly expected, yet attempting to avoid any responsibility. Additionally, continuous criticism has emerged regarding a double standard, noting that an individual who has appealed for the human rights and respect of the disabled has treated the portrait rights and personal rights of others lightly.
Response to the apology and controversy
It is being pointed out that while he used formal videos involving planning, filming, editing, and subtitles when criticizing others, as the controversy grew, he concluded it with a short 11-line text apology on the YouTube Community tab rather than an explanatory video. There was no follow-up communication regarding a detailed explanation of the circumstances or how he would act and what he would take responsibility for after the apology. Also, claims were raised in the comments that early in the incident, comments pointing out Park We's failure to wear a seatbelt were deleted or hidden (shadow-banned), and subsequently, the problematic video was set to private without any separate explanation. The fact that an influencer who usually promoted "transparent communication" chose the most authoritative and deceptive method to block the public's eyes and ears during a crisis has resulted in further public resentment.
Contradiction with the channel's message
While he utilized the frame of being a member of a socially disadvantaged group, public disappointment and anger have grown because this was a clear case of "power abuse" (gapjil), where a "strong" person holding media power as a CEO of a corporation and a channel with 1 million subscribers trampled upon a low-level social service agent in his early 20s who is performing military service for compensation that is less than the minimum wage. Criticism has emerged that it was particularly inappropriate given that he is an individual who has emphasized "good influence," "miracles," and "diversity and harmony" from the position of a socially disadvantaged person with a disability. It is argued that publicly shaming a social service agent—who made a mistake while trying to help and apologized immediately on-site—by even releasing CCTV footage is in complete contradiction to his existing message. Even if Korail had evaded responsibility and not even received an apology, a "sniper" (call-out) video could face various legal issues; however, since there is no evidence that Korail is evading responsibility and Park We himself stated that he received a polite apology from the worker, the justification for the video is even more questionable. Furthermore, contrary to the channel's core narrative of "subjective overcoming," it is pointed out that instead of mentioning things he should have taken care of himself, he highlighted only the mistake of the worker who assisted his movement to use as content material. It is also noted that while he did not cover the efforts of Korail and the social service agents who helped him use the KTX without issue over 300 times, he emphasized the single unintentional mistake through expressions such as being "too angry" or "flabbergasted," or stating that "people providing help need more training." Above all, it is a painful point that despite receiving support by strongly appealing values such as faith, love, and forgiveness through lectures and videos, he showed not a shred of tolerance toward a young man who made a mistake while helping him and apologized immediately. Fatal criticism follows that his touted warm humanism was merely selective hypocrisy and a business shell that only functions when it benefits him. Following the actual posting of the apology, comments continued to criticize that it is unpleasant for someone who appeals as a member of the socially disadvantaged to publicly corner a younger person in a socially and economically weaker position, and that it does not suit the purpose of a channel that has been talking about good influence. Even among his existing fanbase, strong voices emerged calling for restraint in cyberbullying, stating that it was too much to ostracize him to this extent when it wasn't intentional and he had already apologized.
Suspicions of commercialization and hype-seeking
Criticism is being raised because, even though the situation was settled after receiving an apology on-site, instead of immediate protest or a public civil complaint, he reprocessed it into a video with subtitles and editing and uploaded it to a profit-generating platform several days later. While ostensibly claiming to "expose the poor reality of mobility rights for the disabled," suspicions are being raised that he may have packaged private anger under the guise of public interest, as he focused more on highlighting the specific agent's negligence rather than the lack of infrastructure. At a time when the channel's early narrative of "overcoming disability" and "positivity" had been somewhat consumed and needed new momentum, the act of disguising a simple happening—which had already been concluded with an apology on-site—as a "public interest exposure" by adding provocative thumbnails and editing is highly likely to be interpreted as an intentional "view count hunt." This raises reasonable suspicion that he used even the accidents he experienced as material for commercial "noise marketing" to overcome the channel's stagnation and be selected by the algorithm. If he willingly used a fatal risk involving another person's social life as fuel for views to maintain the channel's influence and revenue, this is evidence that he has fallen into serious moral hazard as a massive YouTuber, beyond a simple emotional mistake. Suspicions are also being raised that he may have undergone excessive X-ray imaging to find even a small amount of damage he sustained in order to turn the statement "I took 30-times X-rays" into content. Additionally, although the channel is not a personal broadcast but is produced and operated by We Miracle Factory Co., Ltd., where Park We is the CEO, and involves multiple personnel such as editors and PDs, the absence of an internal control system is being pointed out, as no one prevented the exposure of a private citizen's identity and the risk of cyberbullying during the planning and editing process. Park We had a prior record of being criticized for losing his original intention and becoming money-driven after introducing a paid membership to the channel a few months before the incident, and the bitter reality is that due to this controversy, those opinions can no longer be dismissed as mere groundless claims.
The burden placed on the worker on-site
There are also points regarding the psychological and administrative pressure felt by the social service agent and station staff after the accident. Since Park We is an influencer with significant speaking power, having influenced government policy and communicated with the President, the on-site workers may have feared that the incident could escalate beyond a simple safety accident into civil complaints, internal investigations, or disciplinary action. While it has not been confirmed that they feared disadvantages, it is pointed out that the fact that an accident occurring while helping a passenger was publicly disclosed on a large scale along with CCTV footage just a few days later could have acted as a burden. Meanwhile, suspicions were also raised regarding how the CCTV footage, which was not de-identified, was obtained.
Concerns about the ripple effect
Concerns are being raised that the act of a mistake made while helping with good intentions being "permanently recorded" (exposed) on a channel with 1 million subscribers could instead create a "chilling effect," discouraging non-disabled people from assisting the disabled. If a psychological barrier is formed where "if you make even a small mistake while helping, you can become a target of cyberbullying," the entire disabled population who need help in daily life could be disconnected from social goodwill. Institutionally, due to the nature of public service to fundamentally block potential problems, it is expected that regulations will be strengthened, such as not assigning disability support tasks to social service agents or requiring them to work in teams of two with station staff. Although Korail's guide for services for the transportation vulnerable states that station staff are responsible, it has been common practice for social service agents to perform these tasks alone, as seen in this video.
Among the disabled, there is significant concern that support personnel may be reduced and perceptions of the disabled may worsen. Furthermore, following this controversy, other individuals with lower-body disabilities expressed their stance, saying, "I hope the service support personnel who were unfairly criticized are protected, and that perceptions of the disabled as a whole do not worsen due to this incident." They even directly proved that the social service agent's response was normal support by uploading videos of the boarding process where station staff or social service agents are stepping on the lift's sloped section when they board trains. Concerned comments regarding the ripple effect of this controversy have also appeared on the Korea Economic Daily and Park We's own Instagram posts.