Ex-BIGBANG's T.O.P's alleged ex-girlfriend claims IU charges USD 500K to spend time with people; fans urge singer to sue
Beloved singer-songwriter and actress IU has been unwillingly swept into a disturbing controversy. Recently, sensational and unverified claims were made about her during an episode of a podcast. The episode in question, released by Above The Influence, featured a guest who made bold accusations about the alleged presence of escort-like arrangements within the K-pop industry. Shockingly, she used IU as an example in one of her claims.
The guest was an influencer who introduced herself as Kira. She alleged that she was once in a relationship with T.O.P, a former member of BIGBANG. She further claimed during her appearance that some top-tier female celebrities in South Korea were involved in secretive, transactional relationships with powerful and wealthy men.
Watch the podcast clip mentioning IU here:
Without presenting any evidence or verifiable details, Kira went on to allege that entertainment companies facilitated such arrangements. She suggested that if someone was rich enough 'like a Chinese businessman,' they could 'go to these entertainment companies and request spending a night, even with top K-Pop stars.'
Though Kira did not accuse IU of any direct involvement, she used the singer's name while providing an alleged 'example' of pricing. She claims that spending a night with IU could cost up to 500,000 USD. The casual and speculative manner in which she brought up IU 's name immediately triggered backlash. Fans and netizens criticize the podcast for platforming such statements without scrutiny or responsibility.
Fans erupt in fury over defamatory claims
IU, whose real name is Lee Ji Eun, has long been recognized for her impeccable reputation, philanthropic efforts, and clean public image throughout her career. She has remained one of South Korea's most respected and admired figures in entertainment. For such a name to be inserted into an unfounded and sensationalized conversation shocked many and sparked immediate uproar online.
Social media platforms were quickly flooded with messages from IU's fans, known as Uaenas. They are demanding that legal action be taken. Many pointed out that even speculative comments, when tied to a public figure, can have serious consequences. Fans called for EDAM Entertainment, IU's agency, to step in with a strong legal response. They want not only to defend IU's image but to send a message about the consequences of spreading unsubstantiated rumors.
Meanwhile, this is not the first time the concept of 'sponsorships' has been discussed in K-pop circles. It is a euphemism used to describe alleged transactional relationships between celebrities and wealthy individuals. While some past cases have involved criminal investigations and legal proceedings, the reckless revival of such narratives without evidence or context poses a real threat to artists' reputations.
Citing IU, one of the industry's most respected and scandal-free figures, as an alleged example, has crossed a line for many viewers. As of now, EDAM Entertainment has not released an official statement regarding the incident. However, given the magnitude of public reaction and the seriousness of the claims, many believe a response may soon follow.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
36 minutes ago
- Mint
Mercy For None review: So Ji-sub leads Netflix's gritty revenge drama that hits hard but lacks originality and depth
Netflix's latest K-drama 'Mercy For None' lives up to its title — there's truly no mercy, especially from its lead character, Nam Gi-jun. A former gangster turned avenger, Gi-jun (So Ji-sub) sets out on a relentless path of vengeance after the death of his younger brother, Gi-seok (Lee Joon-hyuk). From the first scene to the last, Gi-jun has one goal: make those responsible for his brother's death pay, no matter the cost. The premise is as straightforward as it gets: younger brother dies in suspicious circumstances, older brother seeks revenge, and a blood-soaked trail of justice follows. The show is set firmly in the criminal underworld, dominated by two major gangs — Ju-woon and Bong-san — who maintain an uneasy truce until that balance is shattered. Gu Jun-mo (Gong Myung), the arrogant and short-tempered son of Gu Bong-san, orders the killing of Gi-seok, triggering the central conflict. Watch the show's trailer here: So Ji-sub plays Nam Gi-jun with his signature stoicism, a trait fans of 'Doctor Lawyer' or 'A Company Man' will recognise. He's ice-cold, ruthless, and unwavering — a man whose pain fuels his cruelty. If you were even remotely involved in Gi-seok's death, you're either dead, or barely holding on with broken ribs. While the story lacks originality, the performances add weight. Gong Myung is a surprising standout as Gu Jun-mo. Known mostly for his soft, romantic roles, Myung turns menacing here — his violent outbursts chilling and unpredictable. Choo Young-woo also delivers a strong performance as the hidden mastermind, Lee Geum-son. His transformation from a reluctant prosecutor to a cold-blooded heir to a crime empire is one of the show's few satisfying twists. The action choreography is one of 'Mercy For None's clear strengths. The scenes are slick, brutal, and impressively shot. Two moments, in particular, stand out. The first is a chaotic brawl in a computer cafe — our first glimpse at how terrifyingly efficient Gi-jun can be in combat even with a missing Achilles Heel. The second is the final scene, where Gi-jun, bloodied and broken, sits at his remote campsite and imagines his brother beside him. He breaks down, overwhelmed with grief, and dies quietly. It's the only moment we see his vulnerability, and it lands with genuine emotion — though it feels a little too late. Unfortunately, 'Mercy For None' falls into the trap of overdoing the hero's invincibility. Gi-jun takes more beatings, stabbings, and bullets than any man should, yet keeps going like he's made of steel. During the final face-off with Lee Geum-son, he's shot twice and still manages to make it to his secluded campsite. It stretches believability to the limit and gives the show a slightly over-the-top, almost Bollywood-style flair that doesn't quite fit the otherwise gritty tone. In the end, 'Mercy For None' is a visually polished, well-acted revenge drama that doesn't bring much new to the genre. It delivers brutal fights and emotional beats, but the story is too thin and predictable to leave a real mark. So Ji-sub is compelling as ever, and Gong Myung is a revelation in his role — but the show doesn't do enough with its characters to elevate itself beyond average. Verdict: Watch it if you're a fan of dark dramas, but don't expect it to break new ground. 2.5 out of 5 stars for this tale of revenge.
Pink Villa
3 hours ago
- Pink Villa
Did Deborra-Lee Furness Pay 11 Million USD for NYC House to Hugh Jackman Before Divorce Filing? Here's What Reports Reveal
Hugh Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness announced their separation two years ago, leaving their fans heartbroken. In the past week, the Australian actress filed for divorce from her ex-husband, with whom she shares two kids. As per the new reports, the former couple quietly split 23 million USD worth of NYC home days before Furness headed for the legal separation. Furness reportedly bought out the Wolverine star by paying him 11.7 million USD, or half of the property, according to People Magazine. Meanwhile, as per the property records, the NYC penthouse that the former partners settled on before heading for divorce is just one of the luxurious mansions. The duo also owned properties together across the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. Hugh Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness' luxurious mansions Apart from the New York residence, the Logan actor and Furness bought a luxurious condo in Manhattan's Chelsea neighborhood. The mansion spreads across 5,000 square feet, with two floors and an outer space, which would have been 3,700 square feet wide. The residence is situated over the Hudson River, and is known for its breathtaking view. Additionally, the exes, who had been married for 30 years, also own a waterfront condo in Sydney, overlooking the popular Bondi Beach. Other properties on the list include New York City's West Village and a Hamptons beach house. Deborra-Lee Furness' statement after filing for divorce from Hugh Jackman Meanwhile, the actress broke her silence for the first time after filing for divorce from the Marvel actor. In conversation with the media portal, Furness shared that she empathizes with all those who have traversed through the journey of betrayal. She went on to reveal, "We have been blessed to share almost 3 decades together as husband and wife in a wonderful, loving marriage. Our journey now is shifting and we have decided to separate to pursue our individual growth." Deborra-Lee Furness and Hugh Jackman married each other in 1996 and called it quits after almost 30 years.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
UK judge raises alarm after lawyers submit fake legal cases produced by AI tools
Lawyers have cited fake cases generated by artificial intelligence in court proceedings in England, a judge has said - warning that attorneys could be prosecuted if they don't check the accuracy of their research. High Court justice Victoria Sharp said the misuse of AI has "serious implications for the administration of justice and public confidence in the justice system." In the latest example of how judicial systems around the world are grappling with how to handle the increasing presence of artificial intelligence in court, Sharp and fellow judge Jeremy Johnson chastised lawyers in two recent cases in a ruling on Friday. They were asked to rule after lower court judges raised concerns about "suspected use by lawyers of generative artificial intelligence tools to produce written legal arguments or witness statements which are not then checked," leading to false information being put before the court. In a ruling written by Sharp, the judges said that in a 90 million pound (USD 120 million) lawsuit over an alleged breach of a financing agreement involving the Qatar National Bank, a lawyer cited 18 cases that did not exist. Live Events The client in the case, Hamad Al-Haroun, apologised for unintentionally misleading the court with false information produced by publicly available AI tools, and said he was responsible, rather than his solicitor Abid Hussain. But Sharp said it was "extraordinary that the lawyer was relying on the client for the accuracy of their legal research, rather than the other way around." In the other incident, a lawyer cited five fake cases in a tenant's housing claim against the London Borough of Haringey. Barrister Sarah Forey denied using AI, but Sharp said she had "not provided to the court a coherent explanation for what happened." The judges referred the lawyers in both cases to their professional regulators, but did not take more serious action. Sharp said providing false material as if it were genuine could be considered contempt of court or, in the "most egregious cases," perverting the course of justice, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. She said in the judgment that AI is a "powerful technology" and a "useful tool" for the law. "Artificial intelligence is a tool that carries with it risks as well as opportunities," the judge said. "Its use must take place therefore with an appropriate degree of oversight, and within a regulatory framework that ensures compliance with well-established professional and ethical standards if public confidence in the administration of justice is to be maintained."
