On July 17, the Seoul Western District Court convened for the third hearing of Belift Lab’s 20 billion KRW (approx. $14.4 million) defamation lawsuit against Min Hee-jin, ex-CEO of ADOR. The case has garnered widespread public attention due to its implications for creative ownership and intellectual property within the K-pop industry.
Allegations and Counterarguments
Min Hee-jin has asserted that ILLIT imitated multiple elements of NewJeans’ branding, including album design, marketing aesthetics, and even specific poses and styles used in promotional material. She described the resemblance as “beyond coincidence” and labeled ILLIT as a deliberate copy of her original group.
Belift Lab, however, presented a detailed rebuttal, referring to Min’s position as the “omnipotent creator fallacy.” They argued that by Min’s logic, NewJeans themselves could be interpreted as copying earlier K-pop groups such as GFRIEND or BLACKPINK. Belift cited similarities in styling, music video structure, and visual concepts that predate NewJeans’ 2022 debut.
Additionally, Belift criticized the subjective nature of Min’s claims, noting that she relied heavily on brief screenshots and online community posts rather than legal or technical standards of plagiarism. They stated, “Aesthetic overlaps do not equate to intentional copying.”
Claims of Double Standards
The agency also highlighted what they see as a double standard in Min’s approach. When NewJeans’ song Bubble Gum faced plagiarism accusations, Min dismissed the concerns, stating the melody in question was “a common compositional element.” Belift argues that she has applied far more rigid standards to ILLIT, questioning the consistency of her stance.
In response, Min’s legal team stated that her comments were not personal attacks, but rather responses to widespread public discussion. They cited discussions on Korean platforms such as FM Korea, Theqoo, and Instiz, as well as testimony from a former HYBE employee, to argue that Min acted in defense of her creative work following an internal audit and negative press attention.
They emphasized that Min’s statements were made in the context of whistleblowing and defending ADOR, and not as unprovoked public accusations.
How Netizen Reacts: “NewJeans Isn’t the First”
Amid ongoing debate, a comment from Korean online forum Pann gained traction, stating, “The hanbok shoot that NewJeans fans insist ILLIT copied? That concept was done first by fromis_9 in 2021 right after they joined HYBE.”
The post further emphasized that fromis_9, also a HYBE girl group at the time, had conducted a pastel-toned hanbok photoshoot at a traditional Korean house, predating NewJeans’ similar visual themes.
This sentiment reflects growing skepticism among some netizens, who believe the use of traditional hanbok and pastel styling is not unique to any one group, and is instead a recurring motif in K-pop’s visual language.
Comments on Pann:
- The debut stage, electronic billboard ads, choreography, concept photos, and promotion styles are extremely similar—and even the carefully posed, soft pastel-toned hanbok photoshoots of girl groups from the same company are alike, lol. Isn’t it only HYBE fans (“Ha-bung-i”) who are desperately pretending not to see this?
- But then why, when ILLIT’s photoshoot was released, were all the comments mentioning NewJeans? If it resembled Fromis_9, shouldn’t the comments have been about Fromis_9?
- BELIFT LAB’s argument can be refuted by one of their own promotional articles released during their debut, lol.
- Isn’t this just the same location and clothing? When you look at the photos accused of copying, even the composition and color tone are nearly identical.
- The debut stage, billboard promotions, choreography, concept photos, and pastel-toned, carefully posed hanbok shoots of girl groups from the same company are extremely similar.
The lawsuit reflects a broader discussion in the K-pop industry about the boundaries of creative influence and what constitutes plagiarism in an environment where visual and conceptual themes frequently intersect. The next hearing is scheduled for October 31 at 4 PM.
Nate, pann
You must be logged in to post a comment.