Key takeaways
- BELIFT LAB filed a criminal complaint after ENHYPEN member Jay endured months of stalking that included unauthorized recording and distribution of private phone conversations across multiple platforms.
- The stalker used false claims about utility services and Jay's family to establish credibility, then persisted with repeated contact despite receiving no response from the artist.
- The agency stated it will pursue strong legal action without settlements or leniency, maintaining a zero-tolerance policy toward privacy violations and harassment targeting its artists.
On November 3, BELIFT LAB released an official statement confirming that ENHYPEN member Jay has been subjected to serious privacy violations and stalking by an individual. The agency detailed the incident and announced it has filed a criminal complaint against the person responsible, marking a significant escalation in the company’s response to threats against its artists’ safety.
The stalking began in June when the individual first attempted to contact Jay’s personal phone number under false pretenses. Rather than immediately identify themselves or state their true purpose, the stalker claimed to represent an internet and television installation service center. The individual referenced Jay’s family in their initial approach, attempting to build credibility and secure permission for future contact. When Jay directly verified these claims with his family members, the deception was confirmed. No such service had been requested.
Despite receiving no response from the artist, the individual persisted with repeated calls and continued harassment over subsequent months. The pattern of contact caused Jay documented psychological distress and anxiety. The stalker’s behavior escalated dramatically when they began secretly recording their phone conversations with the artist without consent.
These unauthorized recordings were then distributed across multiple platforms including KakaoTalk, Instagram, and X Spaces, amplifying the privacy invasion and potential legal violations. When the individual’s actions became public knowledge, they attempted to evade responsibility by offering contradictory explanations: claiming the calls were work-related, suggesting their account had been hacked, and subsequently deleting their accounts.
The Mechanics of Deception
Initial Contact Strategy
The stalker’s opening approach demonstrated premeditation. Rather than straightforward contact, the individual crafted an elaborate false narrative designed to establish legitimacy and lower Jay’s guard. By claiming affiliation with a utility installation company and invoking knowledge of the artist’s family, the stalker attempted to position themselves as someone with legitimate business reasons for contact. This strategy suggests either prior research into Jay’s personal details or an opportunistic approach that was then personalized. The deception fell apart only when Jay took the additional step of verifying the story directly with family members, who had no record of any such service inquiry.
Escalation Through Persistence
Following the failed initial deception, many individuals would have abandoned contact. This stalker, by contrast, demonstrated obsessive persistence. Repeated calls came despite Jay’s lack of reciprocation, a clear signal of disinterest. The individual showed indifference to normal social cues and boundaries, continuing contact that was obviously unwanted. This persistence pattern is particularly concerning because it suggests the individual viewed repeated unwanted contact not as a barrier to overcome but as a legitimate continuation of their objective.
Recording, Distribution, and Evasion Tactics
Unauthorized Documentation
The recording of phone conversations without consent transformed the incident from invasive harassment into a documented crime. Phone recording laws vary by jurisdiction, but in most places both parties must consent to recording. By secretly recording conversations and then distributing them, the stalker created a permanent record of their interaction with Jay and broadcast it publicly. The choice to distribute specifically on KakaoTalk, Instagram, and X Spaces indicates an intent to reach audiences across multiple platforms simultaneously, maximizing the exposure and potential harm.
Public Distribution and Responsibility Avoidance
Once the recordings surfaced publicly and attention focused on the stalker’s actions, their response revealed further dishonesty. They offered mutually contradictory explanations: suggesting the calls were work-related while simultaneously claiming their account had been compromised through hacking. These shifting narratives and the subsequent deletion of accounts suggest awareness of wrongdoing and an attempt to eliminate evidence rather than a genuine explanation for their conduct.
BELIFT LAB’s Legal and Investigative Response
Criminal Complaint and Telecommunications Inquiry
BELIFT LAB assessed the conduct as meeting thresholds for criminal action. The agency filed a formal criminal complaint against the individual and separately contacted South Korea’s three major telecommunications providers requesting assistance in identifying the stalker through phone records. This dual approach combines criminal prosecution with administrative cooperation to determine the identity of the person responsible.
The agency’s assessment of the offense emphasized multiple aggravating factors: the calculated deception used to manipulate Jay, the persistence despite clear disinterest, the psychological harm documented in the artist, and most critically the unauthorized recording and public distribution of private conversations. BELIFT LAB stated that taken together, these elements indicated deliberate and malicious conduct rather than impulsive behavior or misunderstanding.
Commitment to Zero Tolerance
BELIFT LAB explicitly stated it will pursue strong legal action against stalking and privacy violations consistent with a zero-tolerance policy. The agency made clear it will not extend leniency or consider settlements with those responsible for such offenses. This public stance serves both as reassurance to the affected artist and as notice to potential stalkers that the company considers such violations serious matters worthy of full legal remedies rather than negotiated resolutions.
Community Involvement and Ongoing Protection Systems
Fan reports and information contributed meaningfully to BELIFT LAB’s investigation and the decision to file a criminal complaint. The agency publicly thanked supporters who provided information throughout the process. To formalize reporting mechanisms, BELIFT LAB maintains an Artist Rights Protection page at protect.hybecorp.com where fans can submit reports of harassment or privacy violations targeting company artists. The agency stated these reports are continuously reviewed by relevant departments and encouraged ongoing community participation in identifying and reporting such incidents.
Source: Soompi
Frequently Asked Questions
When did the stalking of Jay begin?
The stalking began in June, when the individual first attempted to contact Jay's personal phone number under false pretenses, claiming to represent an internet and television installation service.
How did BELIFT LAB respond to the stalking incident?
BELIFT LAB filed a criminal complaint and contacted South Korea's three major telecommunications providers to assist in identifying the stalker. The agency stated it will pursue strong legal action and will not offer settlements or leniency to those responsible.
Where can fans report harassment against ENHYPEN artists?
Fans can submit reports through BELIFT LAB's Artist Rights Protection page at protect.hybecorp.com. The agency states these reports are continuously reviewed by relevant departments.
