On January 15, the 33rd Civil Division of the Seoul Central District Court ruled that The Givers and its CEO Ahn Sung Il must jointly pay approximately ₩499.5 million (approximately USD 375,000) in damages to ATTRAKT. The court also ordered Baek, a director of The Givers, to jointly pay ₩449.5 million of that amount together with The Givers and Ahn.
The ruling stems from a damages lawsuit worth approximately ₩2 billion that ATTRAKT filed in September 2023. ATTRAKT alleged that The Givers and its executives breached their service agreement and committed acts of deception and breach of trust, resulting in substantial financial losses.
FIFTY FIFTY rose to global prominence in 2023 with the viral success of Cupid, which topped international charts and marked a rare breakthrough for a rookie K-pop girl group. Shortly after the song’s success, the group was involved in a high-profile exclusive contract dispute with ATTRAKT.
ATTRAKT has consistently maintained that The Givers was the driving force behind the conflict, alleging that the company had engaged in so-called “tampering” – illegal pre-contractual contact with artists before their exclusive agreements expired.
CEO Ahn Sung Il, who produced Cupid, had signed a five-year project management (PM) service agreement with ATTRAKT in June 2021. Under the agreement, he was responsible for discovering and developing a new girl group, as well as overseeing major production duties.
ATTRAKT alleged that, while entrusting these responsibilities, The Givers breached contractual obligations and acted against the company’s interests, ultimately contributing to the breakdown of trust and exclusive contract dispute involving FIFTY FIFTY.
As a result, ATTRAKT filed numerous civil and criminal complaints against The Givers and Ahn Sung Il, centering on allegations of tampering and breach of fiduciary duty.
Although the court did not award the full amount requested by ATTRAKT, the ruling marks a significant legal victory for the agency and strengthens judicial scrutiny of outside interference in idol management contracts.
The verdict adds another chapter to one of K-pop’s most controversial legal sagas in recent years, with implications for how project-based producers and agencies structure responsibility, authority and accountability from here on out.
Sources: Daum
