A man in his 20s put on trial for allegedly impersonating a member of the idol group BTS and unlawfully collecting information about military service and unreleased music tracks has been sentenced to prison in the court of appeals.
According to the legal community and Newsis on the 16th, the Criminal Appeals Division 5-2 of the Seoul Central District Court sentenced the impersonator to a year in prison in the appeals court during the first trial as he was charged with violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection.
The impersonator was indicted and kept in custody for allegedly approaching a record producer through his phone as if he were a member of BTS, collecting information on military service, and receiving unreleased guide tracks.
Specifically, it was found that he received unreleased guide tracks from a producer while impersonating BTS member Suga (real name Min Yoon Ki) and having conversations with the producer from August to September 2022. Around November of that year, he impersonated the producer and contacted Suga to collect information on album release preparations, expected release dates, and military service related to the enlistment period.
Moreover, the impersonator was found to have received over ten unreleased guide track files from another producer while pretending to be V (real name Kim Tae Hyung), another member of BTS.
He was also charged with the unauthorized collection of undisclosed information (obstruction of business), including the information on the company’s album release dates, unreleased songs, personal information of the singers in the agency, and schedules.
The first trial sentenced him to imprisonment as the BTS members and the company could have suffered significant financial and social damage due to his actions. The impersonator is a music producer who was also reported to have participated in the song production of famous idol groups in the past.
The first trial court pointed out that “the motive for the crime was to win people’s favor by impersonating a successful composer using the collected unreleased information,” and that “the crime is serious as he continued to commit the same crime while being investigated.” They added, “The victims who delivered the undisclosed information seem to have suffered considerable mental damage,” and “they have not recovered at all from the damage, and he has not received forgiveness from the victims.”
However, they conveyed the reason for the sentence, saying, “He is currently showing a repentant attitude and the defendant’s family is promising guidance and discipline,” and that they “considered the final ruling and the fairness of the trial altogether.”
The appellate court also rejected the appeals of both the impersonator and the prosecutor, maintaining the first trial’s judgment, saying, “The victims’ intangible damages due to this crime are significant, and there has been no settled agreement.”