Roy Kim’s representatives have issued a statement regarding the lawsuit surrounding the singer’s hit track “Spring Spring Spring.”
The statement followed an appearance in the court of appeals on March 9 at 11 a.m. KST, one year and five months since a verdict was made in Roy Kim’s favor.
The plaintiff submitted a written statement explaining why they believed the Korea Copyright Commission appraisal regarding the plagiarism claims was incorrect. On the other hand, Roy Kim’s representatives stated, “Our stance that this song [“Spring Spring Spring”] is an original creation has not changed. Everything has been revealed, so we question whether any additional appraisals are necessary. We believe that the truth will prevail in the courts.”
In 2013, songwriter Kim Hyung Yong filed a lawsuit against Roy Kim and stated that “Spring Spring Spring” was plagiarized from his CCM track, “Becoming a landscape of God” (literal title). The verdict was made eventually made that the two tracks are not similar enough for a plagiarism claim to be warranted.
The songwriter claimed that a freelance composer he had been working with had given his compositions to Roy Kim, but this was dismissed by the courts.
The Department of Justice ruled, “We have confirmed the existence of sheet music and instrumental recordings from the early stages of Roy Kim’s work with a co-composer in January and February of 2013 that differ from the final production. The plaintiff’s song has never been released through a live performance or an album recording. There was little chance of Roy Kim coming into contact with the plaintiff’s song, and the plaintiff cannot provide sufficient evidence on what music files or sheet music was passed on through what specific routes, basing his case on speculation alone.”
Also, Roy Kim filed for copyright on “Spring Spring Spring” on April 22, 2013 while that of “Becoming a landscape of God” was filed on July 25, 2013.
However, the plaintiff objected to the verdict made in 2015 and filed for an appeal. A final verdict will be made on the matter after the plaintiff’s written statement is reviewed.