Pork belly meat is not the original Jongwon Baek, the court ruling...It's just a personal lawsuit in Dubon Korea

[26.07.12] Court Rules Against Franchisees in Dispute Over Origin of Baek Jong-won's 'Daepae Samgyeopsal'

The Suwon District Court (Anyang Branch) has ruled against franchisees of Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea in a damages lawsuit filed against YouTuber Kim Jae-hwan PD. The court reviewed the historical facts regarding the origin of 'daepae samgyeopsal' (thin-sliced pork belly) and judged that the YouTuber's content fell within the scope of freedom of the press and public interest criticism.

1. Ruling Outcome: Dismissal of Damages Suit and Court Costs

The Suwon District Court, Anyang Branch (Criminal Division 3 Single Judge), dismissed the damages lawsuit filed by franchisees of Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea against the defendant, Kim Jae-hwan PD. Consequently, the court ordered that all litigation costs be borne by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had claimed that the videos produced by the defendant caused a decline in their store revenue and damaged their brand image.

The court determined there was a lack of evidence to support the claim that the defendant's content constituted defamation or was produced with malicious intent to slander. Furthermore, the court viewed the disclosure of information contradicting corporate claims as a matter of public interest. This ruling clarifies the legally permissible scope for critical activities by media and individuals when verifying information related to franchise businesses.

The court recognized that the videos did not constitute the dissemination of false information but rather served as the communication of information for the public interest. Therefore, it concluded that no liability for damages occurred. This ruling is not the final chapter, as the plaintiffs still hold the possibility of appeal. The court provided a detailed explanation of the legal grounds for its decision, ensuring objectivity.

In conclusion, this first-instance ruling sets a precedent by recognizing the legal legitimacy of critical content regarding franchise corporations.

2. The Court's Judgment on the Origin of Daepae Samgyeopsal

Regarding the claim that CEO Baek Jong-won "first developed" daepae samgyeopsal, the court noted that similar grilled meat dishes had been sold in areas such as Busan since the late 1980s. The court clarified that the method of slicing frozen meat thinly with a meat slicer to create thin pork belly was not a unique technological invention by a specific individual. The court reviewed evidence concerning the food culture of the time to address the claim that a 1993 incident involving a machine purchase mistake was the sole origin of the dish.

It was confirmed that similar menu items existed in restaurants in areas like Choryang-dong, Busan, as early as the early 1990s. This suggests that the name and form of "daepae samgyeopsal" were already established in the market prior to the company's marketing strategy. Therefore, the court judged that it is difficult to view this as a specific individual's creation. Empirical materials, such as local newspaper advertisements from the mid-to-late 1980s and menu boards from the period, were accepted as evidence during the trial.

These pieces of evidence support the fact that the name "daepae samgyeopsal" was already in use before the emergence of the specific franchise. Consequently, the court placed little weight on the exclusive origin theory claimed by the corporation. This judicial judgment, based on historical facts, is expected to serve as an important benchmark for verifying the authenticity of marketing narratives in the future.

In short, the court has objectively confirmed through judicial processes that the origin of daepae samgyeopsal was part of the era's dietary culture rather than a specific individual's invention.

3. Critical Media Activities and Freedom of Expression

The court ruled that the activities of the defendant, Kim Jae-hwan PD, constituted the watchdog and critical functions of the press. It was taken into account that Kim PD has covered industry practices through documentary production, and this video was also produced with the intent to verify whether a specific corporation's promotional narrative aligned with actual history. The court viewed the raising of suspicions regarding a franchise brand operated by a famous figure as a matter of public interest, falling within the scope of freedom of expression.

The materials and field reporting records collected by the defendant were interpreted as part of a fact-checking process. The judiciary reaffirmed the principle that even if critical content contradicts a corporation's claims, if it is based on reasonable grounds rather than the dissemination of false information, it must be considered legitimate. This is expected to become an important criterion for critical content aimed at resolving information asymmetry between corporations and consumers to receive legal protection.

When determining whether defamation has occurred, the court weighs the intent of slander against the public interest. The act of media or YouTubers raising questions about the actions of public figures or corporations highlights the functional aspect of enhancing transparency in a democratic society. Therefore, suspicion based on reasonable grounds, rather than false facts, must be protected within the scope of freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution.

Ultimately, it has been reaffirmed that critical expression based on reasonable grounds regarding matters of public interest must be protected as a legitimate exercise of freedom of expression for the transparency of a democratic society.

4. Legal Judgment on Revenue Loss and Causality

The court applied strict standards regarding the direct causal link between the revenue decline claimed by the plaintiffs and the defendant's video publication. The court pointed out that it cannot be concluded that revenue changes were caused by a single video, noting that various variables, such as market conditions and the brand's own risks, could have acted in a complex manner. Issues reported in the media regarding CEO Baek Jong-won and the brand in 2025 are variables that could affect consumer brand awareness and trust.

The court judged that no objective data had been submitted to prove that the critical YouTuber's video was the decisive cause of revenue decline. Therefore, it concluded that a claim for damages based on revenue loss is difficult to sustain legally. This ruling makes it clear that business performance is determined by numerous factors—such as market trends, economic conditions, and internal corporate issues—and not solely by external critical content.

To establish liability for damages under the Civil Act, a substantial causal link must be proven between the illegal act and the damage incurred. Revenue decline is a result influenced by countless variables in the market, and it requires a very high burden of proof to establish causality with a single content post. The court pointed out that the plaintiffs failed to present objective and concrete data to prove this.

In other words, the core of this ruling is that extremely high-level objective evidence is legally required to prove a direct causal link between external critical content and revenue decline.

5. Response and Future Outlook of Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea

As the court ruled that CEO Baek Jong-won's claim of "first developing daepae samgyeopsal" was different from the facts, Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea released an official position regarding the ruling. First, Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea drew a clear line that this was an individual lawsuit filed by franchisees, not the head office, and emphasized the principle of respecting the franchisees' right to file lawsuits. A representative from Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea stated, "This lawsuit was filed individually by franchisees who suffered damage from the YouTuber's malicious videos," adding that the head office is preparing specific measures to protect franchisees.

In August 2025, during an 'Emergency Win-Win Committee for Damages from Certain YouTubers' held at the request of franchisees from each brand, a joint statement signed by about 1,700 franchisees nationwide was delivered. The head office fully recognized the severity of the pain the franchisees were experiencing at that time, and is discussing multi-faceted protective measures considering the significant damage and distress of the franchisees so that no further damage occurs. Furthermore, Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea stated that it will further strengthen legal responses against YouTubers and online community users who produce malicious content or engage in false/defamatory activities.

Currently, the head office is meticulously classifying false information and defamation by type and plans to proceed with appropriate legal measures for each case, carrying them through to the end. This reflects a will to maintain a firm stance to protect the brand and franchisees as a corporation. Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea is closely reviewing the 20 remaining lawsuits with its legal counsel regarding the impact of this first-instance result. It is expected that legal battles between corporations and media will become more intense following this ruling.

To summarize, Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea has distanced itself by clarifying that this ruling stems from individual lawsuits by franchisees, while simultaneously emphasizing that it will continue its firm legal stance against malicious, defamatory content to protect the brand.

Category	Key Details
Lawsuit Details	Damages suit filed by franchisees of Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea against YouTuber Kim Jae-hwan PD
Ruling	Plaintiff Loss (Dismissal of claim)
Company Stance	Emphasized that it is a result of individual lawsuits by franchisees
Key Issue	Authenticity of the origin of Daepae Samgyeopsal, scope of critical media activities
Outlook	20 remaining lawsuits in progress, Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea plans to strengthen legal action

[🔍 Key Summary of Ruling]

• Court Ruling: Dismissal of the damages lawsuit by franchisees of Baek Jong-won's Theborn Korea; the critical content by defendant Kim Jae-hwan PD is recognized as legitimate.
• Verification of Origin: Confirmed existence of Daepae Samgyeopsal since the 1980s; difficult to view as a specific individual's unique invention.
• Company Stance: Stated it was a lawsuit filed by individual franchisees and respects the right to litigate.
• Freedom of Press: Criticism for public interest purposes falls within the scope of freedom of expression.
• Causality: Insufficient evidence to prove direct causal link between video publication and revenue loss.
• Current Status: First result of 21 related lawsuits, with other legal proceedings ongoing.