A South Korean app that lets couples ask AI to decide who was right in an argument has become a talking point online after reaching No. 1 in the App Store’s social networking category two months after launch. According to a News1 report published on Oct. 4 and cited by BlockTempo, the app has attracted 30,000 users.
Users enter the details of a conflict with their partner, and the AI reviews both sides before issuing a result in a format close to a written court ruling. The output includes the decision, the disputed issues, and the reasoning behind it.
News1 test produced a ruling in about five seconds
In its report, News1 tested the app with a fabricated dispute: 「My partner, whom I have dated for three months, drives me around every day and always asks me to throw away the trash in the car. Am I allowed to be upset?」
The AI returned a decision in about five seconds, saying that 「the other party should recognize the user’s discomfort and stop asking the user to handle the trash」. At the same time, it suggested that the user 「could clear out the car’s trash bin for the partner just for today」 and added that 「the kindness of giving you a ride and the request to throw away the trash are two separate matters, and that should be said clearly」.
Developer said the goal was a more objective ruling than friends might give
The report did not disclose the app’s name or the developer’s identity. According to BlockTempo’s summary of the News1 report, the developer wrote on a social media account that when people complain to friends during a relationship, friends usually take their side. The developer said that was why they wanted to build a more objective AI judgment service.
The developer also said that after seeing users treat the service as something entertaining, the structure was expanded into what was described as 「a service where users interact with each other starting from an AI ruling」.
Its public discussion board now receives dozens of case posts each day. The cases range from relatively minor complaints such as a partner delaying a ring order or following an ex-partner’s social media account, to more serious matters including dating violence.
User feedback has split between reconciliation and frustration
Some users said the app helped settle arguments. One user said they usually tended to yield to their partner, but this time felt the partner had gone too far and was unsure whether they had the right to be angry. After showing the app’s ruling to their girlfriend, the girlfriend apologized first, and the user said they reconciled and were getting along well.
Other users said the AI could not fully grasp the context of a conflict, the emotions involved, or the conversations that came before it. One user said the app’s character limit made it difficult to include every detail, so only part of the situation could be entered. The ruling they received, the user said, did not match the real circumstances and felt biased.
That user said: 「I got a ruling like this without it understanding what happened before and after. I cried and even wanted to break up.」
Psychology professors warned against treating AI as the correct answer
Kwak Geum-joo, a psychology professor at Seoul National University, said: 「If people rely too much on AI, they may fail to grasp the subtle emotions in a romantic relationship and start to think every AI solution is right.」
She also said: 「If someone believes the AI’s judgment is the correct answer, decides the other person is at fault, and stops talking with their partner, the conflict could grow instead」, adding that relationships and emotions require personal observation and thought.
Lim Myung-ho, a psychology professor at Dankook University, also urged caution. He said: 「Do not treat AI’s judgment as the correct answer. At most, listen to it as one opinion.」 He added that judgments involving human relationships should still be discussed with people around you who can understand you objectively.
How the app works and where the risks appear
Based on the report, the app’s core function is simple: users describe a conflict, the AI organizes each side’s position, and a judgment is presented in a court-style format. In News1’s test, that process took about five seconds.
The same design also explains the criticism. The product has reached 30,000 users and topped the social networking download ranking within two months, but users who cannot include the full context may receive a result that does not reflect the real situation. The professors quoted in the report gave the same basic warning: AI can serve as a reference, but it should not replace direct conversation between partners.