Former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin’s criminal complaint against labor officials who investigated her workplace harassment case ended without charges after police found no criminal wrongdoing.
According to a JoongAng Ilbo report published on July 9, the Mapo Police Station decided on February 6 not to indict officials from the Seoul Western Branch of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Bureau.
The complaint accused the officials of having falsified official documents, of having used falsified documents and of having neglected their duties during the investigation of the accusations against the Min.
Min, who now serves as CEO of OOAK Records, filed the complaint in 2025 after taking issue with how investigators handled the workplace harassment case, AllKPop reported. It said officials falsely recorded timestamps from KakaoTalk group chat messages and included false information in official investigation records.
“They recorded the messages as if they were sent consecutively, creating an official document containing false facts,” Min said, contesting the investigation. She also argued that investigators did not give her sufficient opportunities to respond to each charge during the trial.
[Exclusive] Min Hee-jin files complaint against labor bureau employee who handled “workplace harassment” case…Police clears charges from employee😂😂
Another loss, congrats 🎉 🎉 👏 👏 https://t.co/L08Vcth50i— Akarimoon1107 (@Akari_moon1107) July 9, 2026
Min Hee Jin fails to move forward with the criminal case
The workplace harassment case began in August 2024 when a former ADOR employee, identified only as “A,” filed a complaint with labor authorities.
The employee alleged that Min verbally abused them and claimed that another manager, identified as “B,” had also committed workplace harassment, Sports Chosun reported.
According to the complaint, Min defended the manager and failed to conduct a proper internal investigation after the incident was reported.
Last March, labor authorities concluded that some of Min’s remarks could have caused physical or psychological distress and worsened the work environment. Officials also found that she had not carried out an objective investigation as an employer and imposed an administrative fine on her.
After reviewing Min’s criminal complaint, police acknowledged that some recording errors existed in the investigation documents. However, investigators determined that the errors were clerical rather than intentional.
Police found no evidence that labor officials fabricated statements or added claims that Min had never made. They instead concluded that the inaccuracies involved contextual recording errors, including incorrect timestamps, which did not meet the legal standards for criminal charges.
Investigators also rejected Min’s claim that she was denied an adequate opportunity to defend herself.
Police said they had reviewed written statements from his legal representatives and found that labor officials had carefully classified and assessed the allegations before making a decision.
