A criminal complaint, not just a warning
BELIFT LAB has filed a criminal complaint against a person accused of stalking ENHYPEN's Jay and distributing recordings of his private phone conversations. The agency set out its case in a statement published on 3 November 2026 under the heading "Update on Strict Legal Action Against Unauthorized Disclosure of an Artist's Personal Information and Stalking", and it describes the conduct as deliberate and malicious rather than a one-off intrusion.
The statement says the harassment stretches back to June 2026, when an individual obtained Jay's private phone number and began calling him repeatedly. The agency also says it has contacted South Korea's three major telecommunications providers to formally request their cooperation in identifying the person responsible, and it has asked fans to keep using HYBE's Artist Rights Protection website to report privacy violations.
For readers, the significance is less about a single statement than about the mechanism it reveals: when a private number leaks, the fallout can run for months, and the response has to be built case by case rather than settled with a single public warning.
How the alleged contact started
According to BELIFT LAB, the first approach came in the guise of ordinary customer service. The caller is said to have pretended to work for an internet and television installation service, mentioned Jay's family, and framed the call as a routine matter about installation. During that first conversation the person reportedly asked when they could call again and passed on their own contact details.
The agency says the caller used false information to build trust. Jay appears to have tested the story himself: he checked the claims with his family, who confirmed that what the caller had said was completely false. That detail matters because it shows the deception was noticed early — and the contact did not stop there.
BELIFT LAB states that the attempts continued even after Jay stopped responding. Repeated calls to his personal number followed the moment the pretext collapsed, which is the point at which a nuisance call becomes something the agency describes in far graver terms.
Secret recordings and where they surfaced
The statement adds a second layer to the case. BELIFT LAB alleges that the individual secretly recorded phone conversations with Jay without his permission, then distributed those recordings across multiple online platforms, naming KakaoTalk, Instagram and X Spaces.
Once material like that circulates, it is effectively impossible to recall. The agency says the distribution deepened its concern for Jay's privacy and personal safety, and it points to the person's behaviour afterwards as evidence of intent: the individual is said to have offered shifting explanations, claiming the calls had been work-related or that their accounts had been hacked, and to have deleted social media accounts.
That sequence — a false pretext, covert recording, public distribution, then denial — is what the agency uses to argue the case goes beyond a simple invasion of privacy. It is a characterisation from one side of a dispute, and a criminal complaint is an allegation that sets a process in motion rather than a finding of guilt; the source reporting does not say whether charges have been brought.
Why the agency is framing this as harm, not inconvenience
BELIFT LAB says the repeated contact caused Jay considerable emotional distress, citing psychological strain and anxiety arising from the calls, the deception and the spread of his private conversations. That framing is central to how the company wants the case understood: not as a fan behaving strangely, but as conduct with a measurable effect on the person on the other end of the phone.
There is also a practical worry woven through the statement. When a private number is exposed and recordings are shared, the exposure itself can invite further attempts, and the agency says the situation raised concerns about additional harm flowing from the release of the artist's personal information. That is why it has treated the matter as a criminal complaint rather than a civil warning or a request to stop.
For an artist, the ordinary protections most people take for granted — a phone number that stays private, a conversation that stays between two people — are the ones that fail first in cases like this.
What the telecom request can realistically do
The step that stands out in the statement is the approach to South Korea's three major telecommunications providers. BELIFT LAB says it formally asked them to cooperate in identifying the person responsible, which is the kind of request that can help establish who was behind a number when the usual digital trail has been deleted.
It is worth being precise about what that means. A request for cooperation is not a guarantee of identification, and the agency has not said what response it has received. Nor does the statement indicate how far any investigation has progressed. What it does show is a company building a record: a public statement, a complaint, and a documented approach to third parties that may hold relevant information.
Fans following the case should treat the specifics as the agency's account of events. The allegations are detailed and dated, but they remain allegations until they are tested through the legal process.
Privacy pressure around ENHYPEN is not new
This is not the first time privacy has been the flashpoint around the group this year. Previously reported coverage detailed Ni-ki's public call-out of secret filming at a concert, which split reaction online and drew a defence of his right to privacy from many fans. The pattern across both stories is the same friction: artists asking for a boundary, and an audience arguing about where it sits.
The wider HYBE system has been leaning harder on legal routes too. BIGHIT MUSIC warned of "no leniency" over false rumours about TXT ahead of that group's comeback, saying it was gathering evidence at home and abroad. Different cases, different alleged conduct, but a similar posture: document, complain, and say so publicly.
For ENHYPEN specifically, the timing sits alongside a busy calendar, with the group named in the first lineup for the 2026 MAMA AWARDS in Osaka. None of that changes the substance of the stalking allegations, but it does explain why an agency might want a clear public record in place while an artist keeps working.
The reporting channel fans are being pointed towards
BELIFT LAB closed its statement by encouraging fans to keep reporting privacy violations and malicious activity through HYBE's official Artist Rights Protection website. That channel is the industry's standard route for turning scattered screenshots and posts into something an agency's legal team can act on.
What the statement does not do is promise outcomes. Reports feed a process, and processes are slow; the value of a submission is often that it timestamps a post before it disappears, not that it produces an immediate response. Fans who want to help can be specific — capture the account, the post, the time — rather than piling into the original thread, which tends to spread the material further.
There is a reasonable conversation to be had about whether these channels feel responsive enough to the people using them, and that is a question worth asking of agencies generally rather than of this case alone.
The takeaway
The essential facts are these: BELIFT LAB says an individual obtained Jay's private number in June 2026, posed as an installation worker, kept calling after the deception was exposed, secretly recorded conversations and shared them on KakaoTalk, Instagram and X Spaces. The agency has filed a criminal complaint and asked the country's three main telecom providers for help identifying the person.
What happens next is a matter of process rather than performance. The statement is a marker of how seriously the company is treating the case, and it puts the specific allegations on the record. Whether they are proven is now for others to determine.
