The Quad (of which India is a part) is the structure more appropriate for that. The point of the Gn (currently 7) was to have a little structure for the folks

The Quad (of which India is a part) is the structure more appropriate for that. The point of the Gn (currently 7) was to have a little structure for the folks who were a big part of the global economy and were worth talking together when there was a common problem. Countries like India and China are still pretty poor on a per capita basis and don't really interact with the international banking, force projection, or trading systems in the way the G6/7 members did and do. G7 members all have per capita gdp in the same neighborhood which gives you an idea of their ability to respond collectively to events (whether they do so well is another matter). Russia was always an anomaly; adding them to the group was more an aspirational goal than a practical one, so it's no wonder that fell apart. SK makes a lot of sense and doesn't even need the justification ("should have another asian member"), though its per capita is far behind the others. Compare that to Australia (also a Quad member) which has a higher per capita gdp than most G7 members and an economy around the same size as SK's -- it's not really big enough on those other topics to be worth adding to the Gn).