The first court date for Yoo Seung Joon's lawsuit to get a visa for South Korea took place at the Seoul Administrative Court on March 4.  In the former singer's stead, his father took part as a witness while a lawyer Yoo Seung Joon chose from Sejong appeared as his legal representative.

Regarding Yoo Seung Joon's application for American citizenship in January, 2002, his legal rep stated, "Yoo Seung Joon could have made an unwise choice in the past. However, he had no intention to evade military service," insisting he only got a citizenship because he was already a permanent resident of the country and his entire family resides there.

Even regarding his application for citizenship a mere three months before his enlistment, the lawyer stated, "After his Japanese performance, Yoo Seung Joon went to see his family in America.  Persuaded by his family, he chose to get his citizenship.  He did have the intention to go to the army, but he made this decision after wavering back and forth. He did not intentionally plan for evasion."

SEE ALSO: What would NewJeans' new name be if they left HYBE?

However, the LA consul general was of a different mind, arguing, "There's no doubt that Yoo Seung Joon intended to evade enlistment.  However, he is making excuses as necessary right now.  The reason for refusing to issue a visa is that Yoo Seung Joon is considered a foreigner feared of harming the national interest."

Yoo Seung Joon's lawyer stated, "Yoo Seung Joon had been forbidden entry [into South Korea] for fourteen years.  We believe that the government's reason for turning down his visa due to 'public interest' has been sufficiently achieved.  You must give Yoo Seung Joon a visa for entrance," suggesting that enough time has now passed.

The LA lawyer countered with, "The visa is in the domain of the sovereignty.  This instance of you, who gave up your Korean citizenship, going into court for an entrance visa, claiming, 'I will go into this country,' does not happen in other countries, either."

The next court date is set for April 15.  What do you think about the points both sides made?