A young music producer has been sentenced to prison after being found guilty of impersonating a member of the globally renowned K-pop group BTS.
The individual, referred to as "A" in court documents, was charged with multiple offences related to identity theft and the unauthorised acquisition of personal and sensitive information.
Photo via Allkpop
Details of the Crime
The Criminal Appeals Department 5-2 of the Seoul Central District Court, overseen by Chief Judge Kim Yong Joong along with judges Kim Ji Sun and So Byeong Jin, handed down the sentence on the 10th. A, aged 29, received a one-year prison sentence for violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communication Network Utilisation and Information Protection.
The investigation revealed that A impersonated BTS member Suga (Min Yoon Gi) in August and September of 2022. Using this false identity, A contacted a record producer, referred to as B, through a mobile phone. During these interactions, A managed to collect sensitive information, including military service details and unreleased guide sound sources.
A’s fraudulent activities didn’t stop there. In November of the same year, A impersonated producer B to directly contact Suga, aiming to gather information about an upcoming album's release date and Suga’s military enlistment schedule. Additionally, A posed as BTS’s V (Kim Tae Hyung) and obtained over ten unreleased guide music files from other producers.
Photo via Cheat Sheet
Impact and Legal Proceedings
The court emphasised the severe impact of A’s actions, noting the significant property and social damage inflicted on BTS members and their management company. The presiding judge stated, "The motive for the crime was to gain popularity by impersonating a successful composer using personal information that was collected." The judge also highlighted A’s continued criminal activities even while under investigation, pointing to a concerning lack of moral integrity.
The victims of A’s impersonation have suffered substantial psychological distress, with no recovery of the leaked information or forgiveness extended to A. Despite A’s family expressing commitment to helping him reform, the court maintained a firm stance on the sentence, acknowledging both the gravity of the offences and the need for fairness in the judicial process.
Final Verdict
Both A’s and the prosecutor’s appeals were rejected by the court. The judges pointed out that the intangible damages suffered by the victims were considerable and that no settlement had been reached. The court’s decision underscores the significant harm caused by A’s actions and reinforces the importance of protecting personal and sensitive information.
A, who has a history of working on songs for well-known idol groups, now faces the consequences of his actions, serving as a cautionary tale about the repercussions of identity theft and unauthorised information acquisition in the music industry.
