The legal battle between BELIFT LAB and former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin over her public claims that ILLIT copied NewJeans reached its final hearing on September 11.
The Seoul Western District Court’s 12th Civil Division heard closing arguments in BELIFT LAB’s damages lawsuit, which seeks approximately ₩2 billion ($1.5 million) from Min. Min has filed a ₩5 billion ($3.7 million) countersuit against BELIFT LAB.
The court closed arguments after the eighth hearing. A first-instance ruling is scheduled for November 13 at 5 p.m. KST.
BELIFT LAB Says Min Hee-Jin Amplified the Copying Claims
BELIFT LAB argued that Min was not simply repeating an opinion that already existed among the public.
Its lawyers said Min, as an experienced K-pop industry professional, had a responsibility for the statements she made about ILLIT and NewJeans.
BELIFT LAB argued that the “ILLIT copied NewJeans” narrative was actively promoted by Min and that her position and influence gave the claims greater impact.
The company also disputed Min’s characterization of her April 2024 comments as merely questions or opinions.
BELIFT LAB Cites NewJeans Parents’ Conversations
BELIFT LAB referred to recordings involving NewJeans members’ parents that it said were submitted as evidence.
According to BELIFT LAB’s description of the recordings, some parents questioned whether the situation needed to go as far as it had.
The company also alleged that Min had shared information about ILLIT with the parents through a group chat and that she influenced their understanding of the alleged similarities between the groups.
BELIFT LAB further claimed that Min created a sense of concern that HYBE, which had created ILLIT, would abandon NewJeans.
These points were presented by BELIFT LAB as arguments and allegations in the lawsuit and were not findings by the court.
BELIFT LAB Describes a Conversation About “Scolding” ILLIT
BELIFT LAB also referred to statements it said came from NewJeans members’ parents concerning a conversation between Min and the members.
According to BELIFT LAB’s account, Min showed the members examples of similarities involving ILLIT and asked whether she should “scold” ILLIT. The members allegedly responded affirmatively.
BELIFT LAB said the members subsequently became concerned that their response could be used as the basis for publicly criticizing ILLIT.
The company also alleged that Min later asked the parents to leave a group chat after HYBE’s audit began because she was concerned that her involvement in raising the ILLIT issue would become known.
Min Hee-Jin’s Lawyers Say the Similarity Debate Predated Her Statements
Min’s legal team argued that concerns about similarities between ILLIT and NewJeans existed before Min publicly addressed the issue.
Her lawyers characterized Min’s actions as an internal complaint about the creative direction of NewJeans rather than an effort to manufacture a controversy.
They argued that HYBE and BELIFT LAB failed to adequately address those concerns and instead placed them within the broader dispute over Min’s management of ADOR.
Min’s Side Argues Her Comments Were Opinion and a Public-Interest Issue
Min’s lawyers also challenged BELIFT LAB’s characterization of her April 25, 2024 press conference comments.
They pointed out that the discussion of ILLIT represented only about five minutes of a press conference lasting more than two hours.
Her lawyers argued that the statement, “Why did you use our choreography?”, was a question seeking an explanation rather than a definitive factual accusation.
They also argued that, even if the statements were considered factual assertions, they were true and constituted a public-interest discussion concerning creative ethics in the K-pop industry.
Min’s side argued that creative similarities should be open to public discussion within the K-pop industry.
The Two Sides Disagree Over Whether Min Caused BELIFT LAB’s Alleged Damages
BELIFT LAB argued that Min’s statements caused financial and reputational harm to the company and ILLIT.
The company cited alleged losses involving advertising as well as psychological harm suffered by ILLIT’s members.
Min’s lawyers disputed the causal connection between her statements and the damages claimed by BELIFT LAB. They argued that matters such as advertising cancellations and negative public evaluations reflected broader public reaction rather than damage directly caused by Min.
Min’s side also argued that BELIFT LAB had not provided sufficient details concerning the specific advertisers, negotiations or conditions behind the alleged advertising losses.
Evidence Became a Point of Dispute During the Final Hearing
The hearing also included arguments over evidence submitted by Min’s legal team.
BELIFT LAB challenged a KakaoTalk exhibit submitted on the day of the hearing, arguing that the identity of one participant could not be verified because the displayed name had been changed through KakaoTalk’s Friends feature.
The company also pointed out that the material did not contain a date and questioned its authenticity and reliability.
Min’s lawyers agreed to withdraw that particular exhibit.
BELIFT LAB also questioned another set of conversations described as taking place “around May,” arguing that the contents did not appear consistent with that timing.
Min’s lawyers explained that they had submitted material in their possession but could not establish the precise date, which was why it had been identified as occurring around May.
The Court Limits Last-Minute Filings
Min’s new legal team, from Hwawoo, submitted a document of approximately 90 pages before the final hearing.
The judge raised concerns about the volume of material, explaining that excessive filings in one case can potentially affect the court’s ability to handle other cases.
The court maintained its general principle of limiting such submissions to approximately 30 pages.
The court also rejected some evidence submitted by Min’s side and declined to accept an additional cause of action BELIFT LAB attempted to introduce shortly before the conclusion of the trial.
Min Hee-Jin Has Filed a ₩5 Billion Countersuit
The dispute is not limited to BELIFT LAB’s damages claim.
Min has filed a ₩5 billion countersuit, arguing that ILLIT’s alleged similarities to NewJeans caused both financial and mental harm.
Her lawyers have argued that NewJeans’ creative identity was developed through a combination of elements including visual direction, debut promotions, promotional materials and choreography, rather than through any single image or performance.
BELIFT LAB disputes the underlying copying allegations.
Verdict Scheduled for November 13
After eight hearings, the Seoul Western District Court concluded the first-instance proceedings on September 11.
The court will now issue its ruling on the claims between BELIFT LAB and Min Hee-jin.
The verdict is scheduled for November 13, 2026, at 5 p.m. KST.
Neither BELIFT LAB’s allegations nor Min Hee-jin’s counterarguments presented at the final hearing constitute the court’s determination of the facts. The court’s judgment will determine the outcome of the first-instance case.
