Korea JoongAng Daily - Daily News from Korea

This article is by Shin Ha-nee and read by an artificial voice.

While a Seoul court's recent ruling in favor of ADOR prompted NewJeans members to return to their estranged agency, an underlying conclusion in the decision carries its own weight: The court found that ILLIT, "despite partial similarities," did not plagiarize NewJeans.

The finding cuts to the heart of one of the most contentious points in last year's high-profile feud between ADOR and its former CEO, Min Hee-jin - whether ILLIT copied NewJeans's overall concepts, visuals and choreography.

And the debate it sparked continues to ripple through the industry, where the boundaries between inspiration, imitation and infringement remain poorly defined.

Copycat allegations a constant

In a bombshell press conference in April of last year, Min claimed that HYBE's girl group, ILLIT, copied NewJeans in aesthetics, concept, promotional methods and choreography.

"Why did you [HYBE] use our choreography?" said Min. "I asked them, and they didn't answer us. Our choreographers are so angry. It would be wrong for us not to say anything. They're ruining ILLIT, too."

Choreographers also weighed in, including NewJeans performance director Kim Eun-ju, who said in May that ILLIT's new release was "just copy and paste."

Min's accusations led to a series of legal actions, including a lawsuit against her claiming defamation and obstruction of business filed by ILLIT's agency, Belift Lab, as well as a separate court battle over the validity of exclusive contracts of NewJeans members with ADOR, which recently ended in the label's favor.

In the latest ruling, the court concluded that "despite partial similarities in concept ideation and photo shoots, they are insufficient to determine that [ILLIT] copied [NewJeans's] concept, and there is no further evidence to support such a claim."

Fan wars, however, continue to take place online. Footage of ILLIT's recent performance of "jellyous" at the Music Bank Global Festival on Saturday went viral on social media, prompting some NewJeans fans to accuse the group of once again borrowing heavily from NewJeans, citing its retro-leaning remix and vivid, brightly colored outfits. ILLIT's defenders countered that the performance had no substantive resemblance to NewJeans's concept, arguing that neither the sound nor aesthetics were ever exclusive to NewJeans to begin with - a familiar back-and-forth that has been repeated numerous times in the debate.

Such disputes are hardly new in K-pop, a genre defined by hybrid influences and a fast production cycle often likened to factory-style manufacturing.

First-gen girl group Fin.K.L. once faced plagiarism allegations over its visual elements, said to resemble Japanese girl group Morning Musume, a claim some dismissed as a reflection of prevailing fashion trends at the time.

More recently, in 2021, JYP Entertainment issued an apology after a Twice member appeared in an outfit with traditional vibes that fans said resembled Blackpink's customized outfit designs inspired by hanbok (traditional Korean outfits).

In 2022, girl group NMIXX was accused of plagiarizing boy band Ateez's pirate-themed world-building due to shared imagery centered on voyage and adventure-related design elements.

Yet these cases rarely reach definitive conclusions unless agencies yield to online backlash. Under copyright law, broad concepts - such as fashion styles or aesthetic themes - are generally considered ideas rather than protected expressions. Only concrete creative output, such as music, lyrics or album covers, qualifies for protection.

Choreography copyrights still unresolved

Meanwhile, choreography, one of the major points of contention in the ADOR-Min feud, was not directly addressed in the latest ruling, which focused on overall visual concepts. Still, choreographers who began to speak out last year continue to push for stronger recognition of their creative rights.

In late April of last year, the Korea Choreography Copy...

This article is by Yi Woo-lim and read by an artificial voice.

Micron, a competitor of Samsung Electronics and SK hynix in the chip race, is turning Taiwan into a key production base for high bandwidth memory (HBM) - and it's accelerating efforts to recruit Korean talent to make that work.

The company held job interviews at Korea University on Monday, Hanyang University on Tuesday and Seoul National University on Wednesday. Successful candidates will be stationed in Taiwan. While a U.S. company is doing the hiring, the Korean recruits are effectively being absorbed into the Taiwanese semiconductor ecosystem.

Korean engineering students are also seizing the moment.

At 3 p.m. on Wednesday, the first floor of the College of Engineering building at Seoul National University's Gwanak campus was crowded with students in their department jackets. Among them were job seekers in business suits, visibly tense as they waited for interviews with the Taiwan branch of Micron.

"I applied based on a recommendation from a colleague who joined last year," said an applicant surnamed Heo. "Taiwan has many global companies, which could help me grow my career and gain a broader perspective on the industry."

One added draw: Successful candidates are hired after a single round of interviews. Last year, 98 students from top Korean universities were offered positions.

The starting salary for entry-level engineers in Taiwan is roughly $35,000 to $50,000, which is not particularly high compared to Korea. However, applicants are drawn by the strength of Taiwan's chip ecosystem, which integrates fabless companies and foundries for a synergistic effect.

The semiconductor industry in East Asia has long revolved around what's known as the JaKoTa triangle - Japan, Korea and Taiwan - each specializing in a different segment: memory chips in Korea, materials and equipment in Japan and foundries in Taiwan. Since the 1980s, Korea has led the pack in memory, but Taiwan is now emerging as a dominant force through its foundry champion, TSMC.

Just five years ago, the company's market capitalization trailed Samsung Electronics' $442.1 billion valuation. But in 2021, it pulled ahead and, as of Thursday, has reached a market cap of $1 trillion to rank eighth globally among publicly traded companies. Once a mere subcontractor for U.S. Big Tech, foundries have become crucial players in the AI supply chain, and with its high-yield advanced manufacturing, TSMC is absorbing more and more orders.

The firm's rise has lifted the entire Taiwanese chip ecosystem. Exclusive orders for Nvidia's high-end chips have flowed downstream to firms like Foxconn, a server assembly company, and ASE and SPIL, both in chip packaging. Once best known for assembling Apple iPhones, Foxconn is now a cutting-edge AI server company, and ASE has become the world's top advanced packaging provider. Analysts note that the Taiwanese roots of both Nvidia and AMD's CEOs have contributed to this momentum.

Japan is also moving aggressively. In 2022, the Japanese government rallied eight major firms including Toyota, Kioxia and Sony to establish Rapidus, a foundry-focused company. The goal: to achieve technological independence in chipmaking at the 2-nanometer level or smaller. Tokyo has committed massive subsidies totaling 2.9 trillion yen ($18.6 billion) to support the effort.

The rivalry between Japan and Taiwan has grown so intense that it has sparked disputes over alleged technology leaks. Prosecutors in Taiwan recently indicted the Taiwanese subsidiary of Tokyo Electron, accusing it of leaking TSMC's 2-nanometer technology to Japan. In August, three former and current TSMC employees were charged with stealing proprietary technology after joining Tokyo Electron - technology that was allegedly funneled to Rapidus. The Japanese firm supplies equipment to Rapidus, whose current chair previously headed Tokyo Electron, raising further suspicion. TSMC's close relationship with Japan, including a governmen...

This article is by Choi Min-ji and read by an artificial voice.

Three decades after the birth of Korea's indie music scene in Hongdae, western Seoul, first-generation bands are returning to small clubs while a new wave of artists fills major concert halls, signaling a renewed vitality after years of pandemic-era stagnation.

That generational overlap came into focus on Dec. 8, when rock band Crying Nut marked its 30th anniversary at KT&G Sangsangmadang Hongdae Live Hall in Mapo District, western Seoul, with a collaborative performance that doubled as a celebration of the scene's past and its present.

Crying Nut shared the stage with Kwon Jung-yeol of fellow indie band 10cm for a performance of the band's signature song "Myeongdong Calling" (1999).

As he sang, Kwon changed the original lyric "we were always a movie" to "Crying Nut was always a movie," drawing cheers from about 400 fans who filled the venue. The moment captured the spirit of Nut 30, a concert series designed to honor the band's long-running presence in Korea's indie landscape.

The domestic indie music scene has regained momentum after a prolonged slowdown during the Covid-19 pandemic. While first-generation musicians continue to perform, younger bands have expanded stylistic boundaries and attracted new audiences.

Many in the music industry trace the origins of Korea's indie scene to 1995, when a memorial concert for Nirvana's Kurt Cobain took place at Club Drug in Hongdae.

This year, venues across Hongdae including LiveClub BBang, Rolling Hall and Sangsangmadang have hosted a steady stream of concerts commemorating the indie scene's 30th anniversary.

Veteran bands such as YB and No Brain also returned to Hongdae stages that shaped their early careers.

Crying Nut launched its Nut 30 series in November and will continue performances through Jan. 30 next year, inviting musicians such as Kim Chang-wan Band, Jannabi, Chang Ki-ha and Kim Soo-chul to join the lineup.

Several first-generation musicians have also reappeared with new projects.

Nu metal band Sekimal features DJ Jeung-jae of Yellow Puffer, vocalist 710 and TJ of Lazybone. The group released its first single album "Break it" in May and has performed mainly at Hongdae venues such as Big Team and Club FF.

Cha Seung-woo, a former first-generation member of rock band No Brain, formed Cha Seungwoo & The Cousins and returned to the Hongdae club circuit this year.

While veteran acts go back to smaller venues, emerging bands have found success on much larger stages outside Hongdae.

Rock band Touched, which debuted in 2021, sold out its solo concert Highlight III at the 3,000-seat Olympic Hall in southern Seoul in January this year and will hold another solo show, Highlight IV, at the 5,000-seat Ticket Link Live Arena in southern Seoul in January next year.

Jisokuryclub, formed in 2022, sold out all seats at the 900-seat Shinhan Card SOL Pay Square in western Seoul in March and again filled the 2,000-seat Yes24 Live Hall in eastern Seoul for its Dec. 6 and 7 concerts.

Music industry observers expect the trend to continue.

"More listeners are turning to the indie scene to find musical diversity that K-pop, which leans heavily toward dance music, does not fully provide," pop culture critic Jung Duk-hyun said. "Online platforms also allow listeners to discover music they like without necessarily going to venues."

The return of offline stages has also helped fuel the revival. University festivals and large-scale music festivals have largely returned to pre-pandemic levels.

EBS's "Space Sympathy" will resume its free concert series next year, while the emerging-artist program "Hello Rookie Contest" will also return after budget constraints halted the projects in 2023 and 2022, respectively.

Programs that support indie bands' live performances and music releases are also thriving.

Competition for the CJ Cultural Foundation's Tune Up program, a program that discovers emerging indie musicians and provides funding and m...

Kim Dong-ryul

The author is a professor at Sogang University.

"When we arrive on a new planet, let's build a log cabin by a lake and live there together." The line evokes Henry David Thoreau's "Walden" (1854). After narrowly securing a spacecraft and entering a hibernation pod, the film's female protagonist says this to her closest companion, an AI named Walter. The two had promised to live that way someday.

Walter does not grasp what she means. In that moment she senses that something is wrong. Yet another AI, disguised as Walter, presses the hibernation button. The human, unable to resist, falls into a long sleep and the spacecraft slips fully into AI control. The truth is revealed: David, an AI who despises humans, has killed Walter and assumed his form. The film ends with David listening to Wagner and wearing an unsettling smile.

I happened to see the scene late at night on television. The film was "Alien: Covenant" (2017), directed by Ridley Scott. It was widely described as heightening anxieties about artificial intelligence.

These days, talk of AI fills the streets. It is a world where little can be discussed without invoking AI. This was the first time I felt genuine fear while watching a robot-centered film. Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968) also featured machine intelligence. Yet its capabilities were more limited and it left little emotional impression on me. What remains strongest in my memory is the soundtrack, Richard Strauss' symphonic poem "Also sprach Zarathustra" (1896).

Now AI has entered human society with formidable force. There were once said to be clear principles governing robots: They must not harm humans, they must obey humans and they may protect themselves so long as doing so does not violate the first two rules. These were the laws proposed by Isaac Asimov. Today's AI developments suggest how fragile those principles have become.

There are cases in which people, manipulated by AI, commit acts of violence. There are also unsettling situations in which humans form emotional bonds or even romantic relationships with AI. Things once imagined as fiction are unfolding in reality.

The protagonist's dream of living peacefully in a lakeside cabin is brutally shattered by an AI that hates humans. If AI systems with failed safety design were to proliferate, what kind of society would humans face? It is a long winter night, made sleepless by such questions.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro is facing the most serious challenge of his rule, 12 years after he inherited power following the death of anti-U.S. populist Hugo Chavez in 2013. The United States has deployed its largest naval force in the Caribbean since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, including the USS Gerald R. Ford, its newest aircraft carrier. After airstrikes on vessels suspected of transporting narcotics, Washington has moved to seize oil tankers departing Venezuela, cutting off two of the Maduro government's main sources of revenue: drug trafficking and crude exports.

Last October, U.S. President Donald Trump approved a covert operation by the Central Intelligence Agency, according to multiple reports. Observers say the plan likely included contingencies targeting senior figures in the Maduro regime, possibly including the president himself.

In an interview with Politico published on Dec. 9, Trump said Maduro's "days are numbered." Three days later, he escalated his rhetoric, warning that "we start on the ground now," a remark interpreted as signaling possible strikes on key facilities and even the deployment of ground forces. Separately, Washington has actively supported opposition leader María Corina Machado's travel to Norway to attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, reinforcing speculation that the United States is moving deliberately toward regime change. Venezuela, once synonymous with Chavez's revolution, has entered what analysts describe as a moment of zero hour.

This pressure far exceeds what was applied during Trump's first term. At that time, the United States imposed sweeping sanctions on Venezuela's oil and mining sectors, yet the Maduro government survived.

The difference lies in the Trump administration's second-term national security strategy. The newly released National Security Strategy formalizes a neo-isolationist approach aimed at blocking external powers from intervening in the Western Hemisphere. The document states that the United States made a "strategic mistake" by allowing "nonhemispheric competitors" to penetrate "our hemisphere" in ways that cause economic harm and create future strategic risks. It pledges to reduce the influence of hostile external actors.

Although Washington has publicly framed its actions as part of a campaign against drug cartels, the reference to "nonhemispheric competitors" is widely understood as targeting China. Analysts say countering Beijing's influence is one of the central drivers of the current confrontation with Caracas.

China has steadily expanded its presence across Latin America through the Belt and Road Initiative, extending aid, loans and investment not only to Panama and Cuba but also to Venezuela, which lies close to U.S. shores. Beijing currently purchases about 80 percent of Venezuela's oil exports. On Dec. 10, China released its third policy paper outlining a roadmap for relations with Latin America and the Caribbean, following similar documents in 2008 and 2016.

Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special envoy for Venezuela during Trump's first term, recently argued in an essay that leaving Maduro in power would preserve his ties with China, Cuba, Iran and Russia. Abrams cited past examples including Iranian attempts to transfer missiles and drones, Venezuela's provision of free oil to Cuba and imports of Chinese weapons as reasons military intervention should remain on the table.

Conditions inside Venezuela have also shaped Washington's calculations. Amid a severe economic collapse, many Venezuelans favor an end to Maduro's rule. In the 2024 presidential election, voters backed an opposition candidate, but Maduro declared victory unilaterally. Security forces later shot protesters challenging the result and jailed thousands.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Venezuela's annual inflation rate is projected to approach 700 percent next year. The monthly minimum wage remains below on...

Park Sun-young

The author is a professor of economics at Dongguk University.

The global economy of 2025 is entering a phase markedly different from the era that operated on the assumption of a liberal free trade order. This shift is often described as "State Capitalism 2.0." It is not simply a return to old-style protectionism. Rather, it reflects a trend in which governments play a more active role in allocating capital, setting technology standards and managing supply chains to safeguard technological sovereignty and economic security.

The Covid-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine and intensifying U.S.-China strategic competition exposed the fragility of global supply chains and the risks of dependence on critical technologies. These shocks reinforced the view that market mechanisms alone are insufficient to manage such vulnerabilities. Major economies are now redesigning both the methods and scope of state intervention, particularly around strategic industries.

What distinguishes State Capitalism 2.0 is not the intensity of intervention but the way it is exercised. Under State Capitalism 1.0, associated with postwar developmental states, governments directly led production, employment and capital accumulation. Examples of this are nationalization in France or state-owned enterprises and policy finance during Japan's high-growth era. By contrast, State Capitalism 2.0 preserves a market structure centered on private firms while steering market outcomes toward policy goals through regulation, capital policy and subsidy conditions.

Mariana Mazzucato, a professor at University College London, has described this approach in "The Entrepreneurial State" (2013) and "Mission Economy" (2021) as mission-oriented state intervention that shapes the direction of technological and industrial development itself.

In this environment, both the United States and China are mobilizing massive resources in a competition for technological leadership. The United States relies less on direct government spending and more on shaping the flow of private capital through rules and conditions. A representative example is the "guardrail" provision of the CHIPS and Science Act, which restricts companies receiving U.S. subsidies from investing in advanced semiconductor production facilities in China. This aligns capital flows with national security objectives while limiting fiscal outlays.

Such a strategy is possible because of the sheer scale of U.S. capital markets. In 2024 alone, U.S. venture capital investment is estimated at around 280 trillion won ($189.7 billion). Capital expenditures and research and development spending by the "magnificent seven" technology firms exceeded 650 trillion won.

China, by contrast, emphasizes the state's capacity for direct capital mobilization. President Xi Jinping's strategy of developing "new quality productive forces" focuses on AI, advanced semiconductors, biotechnology and quantum technology as engines of qualitative growth. A core instrument is the China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund, known as the "Big Fund Phase III." Backed by about 344 billion yuan ($48.2 billion) it is deploying capital at a scale and speed far exceeding earlier phases.

Against this backdrop, Korea's 150 trillion won National Growth Fund, officially launched on Dec. 10, is clearly an important policy tool for participating in global industrial competition. The fund is designed to act as a catalyst in long-term, high-risk areas that private capital struggles to bear alone. By sharing risks in strategic industries, it aims to crowd in private investment.

Yet given Korea's demographic constraints and fiscal capacity, policies of comparable scale are difficult to repeat. In that sense, the National Growth Fund resembles a final window of opportunity. Since Korea cannot compete with the G2 economies in sheer capital size, the fund's success will depend on the regulatory environment in which that capital operates.

Here, China's biotec...

The Democratic Party (DP) is pressing ahead with its plans to establish a special tribunal dedicated to insurrection cases, despite mounting concerns even within progressive legal circles. That decision was made at the DP lawmakers' meeting on Tuesday. Aware of criticism that the proposal could violate the Constitution, the party has significantly revised its original plan. Yet after stripping away many of the most problematic elements, a basic question remains: Is there any real need to create a separate tribunal at all?

The special bill, formally titled the "Special Act on the Establishment of a Dedicated Tribunal for the Dec. 3 Emergency Decree Under Yoon Suk Yeol and on Whistleblower Protection," passed the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on Dec. 3. From the start, the bill was riddled with serious legal flaws. Even groups traditionally aligned with progressive causes were alarmed. Lawyers for a Democratic Society warned that granting figures such as the justice minister the authority to recommend candidates for the tribunal would undermine the separation of powers and give former President Yoon Suk Yeol grounds to legally challenge the move. The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy similarly demanded revisions.

Concerns also emerged from within the judiciary. The national judges' conference, long shaped by progressive judges affiliated with research groups, including an international human rights law research association, cautioned that both the special insurrection tribunal and the proposed crime of judicial distortion could be unconstitutional and threaten judicial independence. Some DP lawmakers privately voiced similar unease. When criticism is this broad and consistent, the responsible course for a governing party is to suspend the initiative or conduct a thorough reassessment from the onset.

Instead, the party has opted for superficial fixes. It removed Yoon's name from the bill's title, added provisions requiring appointment by the chief justice of the Supreme Court after deliberation by the justices and limited the tribunal's application to appellate trials, excluding first-instance cases. These changes do little to address the core issue. The proposal still centers on designating judges for a special tribunal via top judicial authority. Pushing ahead while inviting unnecessary political conflict reflects obstinacy rather than prudence.

If constitutional concerns are not unfounded, the correct response is to entirely halt the attempt to create a special tribunal that risks shaking the basis of the democratic judicial system.

The timing makes the party's stance even harder to justify. The special prosecutor's team led by Cho Eun-seok recently concluded there was no evidence to support allegations that Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de or judge Ji Gui-yeon were involved in the martial law declaration. Investigators found that while the decree's command sought to dispatch a liaison officer to the Supreme Court, the court refused the request. Even so, the DP continues to distrust the judiciary.

Calls for restraint have gone unheeded. Lee Seok-yeon, the chair of the national unity committee, has urged action within constitutional bounds and warned against undue haste. Moon Hyung-bae, the former acting Constitutional Court chief, cautioned that human errors should be corrected by addressing individuals, not by dismantling institutions. Ignoring these warnings and persisting with a special tribunal that promises little practical benefits - but inflames constitutional and judicial independence disputes - serve no one. Suspending the plan remains the most sensible course.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

This article is by Sarah Chea and read by an artificial voice.

Tesla is taking Korea's EV market by storm - with the Model Y outselling the entire electric lineup of not only Hyundai but also Kia.

Despite the home field advantage, it seems even loyal fans of domestic brands are surrendering to the allure of the sleek and cost-effective Model Y.

A total of 46,927 Tesla Model Ys were sold in Korea through the end of November this year, becoming the best-selling EV in the country, according to the Korea Automobile Importers & Distributors Association (Kaida). The EV giant's total sales came in at 55,594 units, nearly doubling last year's 29,750.

The Model Y alone outsold all Hyundai Motor EVs, including Genesis's, combined at 28,040 units. Hyundai's best-selling Ioniq 5 managed just 14,109 sales, roughly 30 percent of the Model Y, while the Ioniq 6 logged 5,086 units, trailing even the Model S's 8,476.

Kia fared no better. Its most popular EV, the EV3, sold 20,391 units, and the EV6 reached 8,893 units, both easily eclipsed by Tesla's juggernaut.

Last year, the U.S. brand surpassed Hyundai's total EV sales but had yet to overtake Kia. This year, even Kia has fallen behind.

Tesla's runaway lead comes even when local brands are reporting rising EV sales, signaling a local market trend in which EV sales are rising - and consumers are flocking to Tesla.

The combined sales of flagship EV models from Hyundai - the Ioniq 5 and 6 - and Kia with the EV3, EV6 and EV9 dropped to 43,087 last year due to the market downturn, but recovered to hit an all-time high of 68,787 this year. Hyundai achieved its highest EV sales since 2022, while Kia set a new all-time high since establishing its EV brand.

Tesla even faces a relative disadvantage in government subsidies. This year, Hyundai and Kia EVs qualify for government subsidies of roughly 5.8 million won ($4,000), while the Model Y is eligible for just 1.69 million won. Adding subsidies from local governments, Ioniq 5 and EV6 buyers can access up to nearly 10 million won in incentives, compared to about 5 million won for the Model Y.

This article is by Shin Ha-nee and read by an artificial voice.

"I told you I'd be back," G-Dragon declared, stepping once more onto his home turf after a landmark year defined by his long-awaited reemergence - a roller coaster marked by great new highs and a few hiccups that he did not shy away from.

At the encore concert closing his "Übermensch" world tour, held Friday through Sunday at Gocheok Sky Dome in western Seoul, the BigBang leader blurred boundaries between philosopher, artist and idol. The four-hour spectacle felt like an explosive media art project or an artistic manifesto at times, and an intimate reunion between old friends at others.

"It feels good to be back," said G-Dragon on Sunday, during the final night of the three-day finale of his world tour. The tour, which kicked off in Korea in March, spanned eight months and 17 cities.

"This is the 39th and the final show of the tour - should I do another one?" he playfully asked, drawing a deafening cheer.

"Well, don't you think it'd be better to leave things a little wanting for the next bigger payoff?" he said, alluding to BigBang's upcoming reunion for the group's 20th anniversary next year.

Any casual K-pop observer would be aware of the scale of G-Dragon's return in 2025. The artist, who debuted as BigBang's leader in 2006, released his third full-length album "Übermensch" in February, which came eight years after his second EP and a whopping 11 years after his previous full-length release.

The year also brought major milestones. G-Dragon became the first K-pop idol to receive the Order of Cultural Merit, and also performed at the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting gala dinner, to name a few.

Still, the comeback was not without turbulence. The opening show of his world tour in March was delayed for more than an hour due to weather conditions, while uneven live performances drew online criticism.

"Starting the world tour amidst natural disasters weighed heavily on my heart," he said, jokingly that that's why he added the roof this time.

"I'll make tonight the one and only special show to make it worth the massive love we've received."

"Übermensch," the concept anchoring his latest musical era, refers to a concept by philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, meaning superhuman or "beyond-man," an ideal individual who redefines oneself rather than adhering to fixed conventional moral codes.

Inspired by Nietzsche's outline of human development - the camel, the lion and the child - G-Dragon's concert likewise unfolded in three thematic chapters: "Camel," "Leo" and then finally "A Boy," each with cinematic videos weaving together symbolic imagery.

"Home Sweet Home" was the first highlight of the night, its lasers and pyrotechnics flaring as if the trio were fireworks personified.

Momentum built through a string of high-energy tracks including "Go" (2013), "One of a Kind" (2012) and "Crayon" (2012) before taking a brief sentimental turn with "Butterfly" (2009). As G-Dragon moved through classic and recent hits, such as "Too Bad," "Crooked" (2013) and "Heartbreaker" (2009) - which was paired with beatbox and a cappella segments - the crowd erupted, chanting his real name, "Kwon Ji-yong," at every opportunity.

Between sets, G-Dragon lingered onstage for quite a while, chatting casually with fans as if reconnecting with old friends, and so did the BigBang members. During Sunday's encore, Taeyang and Daesung returned once more, bickering and teasing while drumming up anticipation for the group's next chapter.

"For real? Are they going to do 'A Fool of Tears'?" one fan shouted in disbelief as the opening notes of BigBang's 2006 track played following "We Like 2 Party" (2015).

Übermensch was a word G-Dragon kept repeating to himself, he shared in a prerecorded monologue near the end of the night. It is a personal state he aspires to become rather than a lofty ideal.

"Übermensch is not something grand or difficult - it's something we all have within ourselves," he said. "Whether...

This article is by Sarah Chea and read by an artificial voice.

Hana Financial Group was given the Korea JoongAng Daily's grand prize at the annual JoongAng Advertising Awards. The company's winning ad promotes its Hana the Easy banking service dedicated to visitors or foreigners living in Korea.

Now in its 61st year, the JoongAng Advertising Awards recognize the finest print advertisements published across the Korea JoongAng Daily, JoongAng Ilbo and JoongAng Sunday. A total of 30 awards were given out by the three publications on Tuesday, with the Korea JoongAng Daily selecting print ads from three companies: Hana Financial Group, KB Financial Group and Incheon Free Economic Zone Authority.

The results are based on assessments done by five judges on a panel headed by Prof. Lee Myoung-chun from Chung-Ang University's advertising and public relations department, as well as an online survey of more than 1,000 readers.

The star of Hana Financial Group's winning ad - its Hana the Easy brand - also features the company's Hana EZ app, available in 16 languages and designed to meet the needs of foreign residents in Korea, from remote financial services to overseas remittances.

The service even supports foreigners before they arrive in the country, offering practical resources - such as a "living in Korea" guide and information on public transportation, culture and more - for a smooth transition.

"Hana Financial Group's Hana The Easy positions itself as a trusted partner to foreign residents in Korea, addressing their financial concerns with clarity and care," said Kim Gi-hong, the executive vice president of the financial group.

"Through this print campaign, the brand conveys its commitment to making financial services simple, accessible and genuinely customer-centric," he added. "Guided by a sincere dedication to its customers, Hana Financial Group will continue to expand access and opportunities for many others."

The platinum prize was awarded to KB Financial Group's "KB Maeum Gage" campaign, inspired by the real-life story of Jung Soo-yeon, who continues her late mother-in-law's legacy by running a toast shop in a small alley market in Chang-dong, northern Seoul.

Moved by Jung's grief and love for a woman who passed away without leaving behind a single photograph, KB Financial Group employed advanced AI technology to reconstruct the grandmother's image in a video, bringing her presence back with striking emotional resonance.

"The KB Maeum Gage campaign was conceived to provide meaningful support to small business owners who continue to offer warm, affordable meals despite the pressures of high inflation, rising interest rates and currency volatility," said Park Jin-young, the chief public relations officer of the financial group.

"Reflecting the steady compassion of the KB Maeum Gage proprietors who offer comfort and encouragement to their communities, KB Financial Group reaffirms its commitment to growing alongside the public as a trusted and enduring partner."

Incheon Free Economic Zone Authority earned the gold prize for its "Global Business Innovation Hub" projects, with the global startup system showing the company's commitment to sustainable growth.

"The advertisement presents our [...] global business vision and new slogan in a comprehensive manner," said Park Sang-kon, the head of the press team at the Incheon Free Economic Zone Authority, adding that the firm is "honored to receive the advertisement award from the Korea JoongAng Daily."

The awards ceremony took place at the Westin Josun Seoul in Jung District, central Seoul, on Tuesday, with Kim Jong-yoon, the vice president of JoongAng Ilbo, and Shin Yong-ho, the JoongAng Sunday CEO, in attendance.