Sabina Musina’s “Spare Suitcase” and Intimate Details of Her Personal Life: How the Trial Unfolded in the Lawsuit Filed by the Co-Owner of G.Bar Against Trushkovsky
01 July 2026 18:04Today, July 1, the Darnytskyi District Court in Kyiv continued hearing the lawsuit filed by Sabina Musina, co-owner of the G.Bar chain, against her ex-husband Andriy Trushkovsky.
As a reminder, crypto blogger Trushkovsky recorded a three-hour monologue last September in which, among other revelations about his life with Musina, he accused her of opening the G.Bar beauty salon with funds stolen from Ukroboronprom. Specifically: in 2015, Musina’s then-husband, Konstantin Cherednichenko—who is accused of embezzling nearly 3.5 million hryvnias from two state-owned enterprises— allegedly allocated $50,000 of the stolen funds to her for the opening of G.Bar. In response, Musina accused Trushkovsky of slander and attempting to ruin her business reputation.
Konstantin Cherednichenko, Sabina Musina’s ex-husband
Several months later, Sabina Musina announced on the social media platform Threads that she had completed the preparatory phase for the trial and had officially filed a lawsuit on December 9 to defend her honor, dignity, and business reputation.
She emphasized that she had deliberately chosen the legal route from the outset, realizing that time was working against her. She explained that in real life, court cases are not resolved quickly and require thorough preparation. According to the blogger, the preparatory phase lasted three months. Lawyers, financial experts, specialists, and notaries were involved in the process. The team gathered materials and facts to refute the public defamation. Sabina also underwent independent forensic examinations.
So today, July 1, the court—with the defense teams for both sides and the plaintiff present—continued to examine the evidence, specifically Andriy Trushkovsky’s monologue-style interview. However, during the first 20 minutes of the hearing, the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ defense teams objected to the presence of a journalist, arguing that they would be discussing strictly confidential matters. Presumably, the discussion centered on sensitive topics—ranging from the specifics of the former couple’s intimate life to family ties. Why the lawyers wanted to hide this information is unknown. After all, Trushkovsky had long ago told the public that behind the facade of Musina’s uninhibited interviews lay a different reality:
“For some reason, you gave an interview saying you’re just so sexually experienced and sexy. I said, ‘Name me just one month when we had sex twice. Name me just one month.’ You were talking about a threesome there. I said, ‘What the hell are you lying about? You’re jealous of me even when it comes to streetlights. You’re jealous of me, for fuck’s sake, of my exes.’”
Sabina Musina and Andriy Trushkovsky
However, the complaints about the lack of sex and jealousy over every lamppost can still be chalked up to run-of-the-mill family feuds, but Trushkovsky’s explanation regarding the origin of his ex-wife’s luxuries noticeably put Musina’s lawyers on edge. The blogger stated outright that behind Sabina’s Instagram charity work and the icons in her home lie dirty, almost looted funds:
“This family also helped children. Well, I’m talking about my ex. Stolen money... You know, the more corruption there is, the more people steal, the more icons they have at home. And so, her whole life... She recently told me this, and I quote:
‘We here with our loved ones understand that this is my punishment for my nephew, who went off to war, was wounded there, and then was taken prisoner. This is my punishment for having helped children my whole life.’ I’m like, “This is your punishment for the fact that both you and your husband have been scamming money from those same kids your whole lives—through the military and so on, and so on, and so on. Through weapons.” Well, that’s just my opinion: the very, very worst karmic money comes from weapons—where people are killed; from drugs—where people die; and from prostitution—where people are deprived of their freedom. But apparently, her line was that she’s doing this to help the kids, not because absolutely everything in her life is funded by stolen money.
And I thought to myself: “Damn, well, Morozuk is such a f***er, yeah, but nobody can do anything about it.” And they let her get away with everything. Like, nobody gives a f*** about her husband and all that. Nobody gives a damn that he’s now serving an 8-year sentence, or that he’s in Europe, and so on. I was worried; I didn’t give any of those interviews or make any of that noise, didn’t show those files from the laptops and so on. And I’m not going to do that now either. I couldn’t care less. After all, he’s not stealing from me—he’s stealing from you.”
It was this particular episode that sparked the most heated debate between the parties to the proceedings. It’s obvious that hearing about money likely earned from the military and comparisons to the Morozuk case was extremely painful for the plaintiff’s side, which is why they activated emergency mode to protect their reputation.
Musina’s attorneys’ activity reached its peak when the court got to analyzing the final points of the interview. The plaintiff’s defense team demanded that the broadcast be turned off literally every minute, having mapped out timestamps in advance to know exactly when to object most vocally. And that’s completely understandable. After all, the conversation then turned to a real slow-burning media bomb—that very “backup briefcase” that could, in an instant, wipe out not only Sabina but her entire beauty empire, along with Lera Borodina and the G.Bar brand.
Andriy Trushkovsky directly reminded everyone of who actually financed this glamorous Instagram business and why Musina had personally begged him to keep quiet at the time:
“The most important thing is that I didn’t reveal these secrets that she was sharing. Here’s the very latest one—one of the secrets that will completely destroy G.Bar’s reputation, Lera Borodina’s reputation, and might even ruin her family. Thanks to Lera Borodina, who didn’t respond to me. You’ve proven once again that you know—that’s the very thing I could reveal about you. I just can’t wrap my head around it. You’d be sitting in prison if you’d done that to me. It’s unforgivable. And it’ll come back to haunt you. It’ll come back to haunt you. At the very least, you’ll lose everything the day this comes to light. Absolutely everything.
But I’m not you. I won’t spread rumors. I won’t drag you into conversations like that. I won’t tear down your empire together with my ex-wife. There are a few people who know the truth. And I know for sure that my ex-wife, at the very least, told me your secrets.
And when I recorded a video in 2021 and said, “If you open your mouth one more time with slander and lies against me, I’ll reveal both your secret and your girlfriend’s secret”—that was the only time she (Sabina Musina—Ed.) called me. We talked for forty minutes—the first time since the divorce—and she said, “I’m begging you, don’t do this. I was hurt; I’m just a girl, and yes, you left, and so on. I’m sorry for what I said. I was wrong.”
Trushkovsky stated in his monologue that he has copies of the files in two different locations and does not plan to make them public. He also claimed that he has no intention of destroying his ex-wife’s business, since his main goal is to protect his reputation from slander, and the fact that she apologized over the phone has already set the record straight.
“I have a little—you know, like a backup briefcase—with two copies in two different places. These aren’t my sins, they aren’t my secrets, and I won’t be sharing them. It’s enough for me, my dear ex-wife, that you apologized to me over the phone. And it really did make things easier. It’s enough for me that we spoke for the first time, and you told me about all the details of what’s going on in your family.”
The next hearing, on July 16, will be no less heated. If Musina’s side continues to press the issue, Andriy’s “backup briefcase” may be opened right in the courtroom. The UA.News editorial team continues to follow the trial.
As a reminder, this isn’t the first public scandal involving G BAR: The “G.Bar” scandal—the firing of an employee over an LGBTQI+ flag—drew attention to the brand’s likely shady start-up capital.
