On December 29, ADOR officially announced Danielle’s removal from NewJeans. ADOR also identified former CEO Min Hee Jin and one of Danielle’s family members as key figures behind the prolonged dispute.
ADOR also confirmed that it will proceed with legal action to obtain penalties and damages against Danielle.
While ADOR did not disclose the specific reasons that justified the termination of Danielle’s contract, industry insiders say there were clear violations serious enough to warrant legal action. This has drawn a lot of attention to how the next lawsuit will play out.
Speculation about a fine exceeding ₩100 billion stems from the calculation method outlined in the Fair Trade Commission’s Standard Guidelines on Exclusive Contracts. Typically, penalties are calculated by multiplying your average monthly earnings for the two years prior to termination by your remaining contract period. When ADOR’s recent revenues – ₩110.3 billion in 2023 and ₩111.1 billion in 2024 – are applied alongside Danielle’s remaining contract period of approximately 54 months, the theoretical compensation per member reaches approximately ₩108 billion, exceeding the ₩100 billion threshold.
However, legal experts widely agree that the likelihood of a court approving this amount is extremely low. Courts have the authority to reduce fines deemed excessively high and, in practice, carefully examine multiple factors, including the artist’s individual contribution, the agency’s actual financial losses, and the circumstances surrounding the alleged breach of contract. One legal professional noted that the ₩100 billion figure appears less like a realistic outcome and more like a pressure tactic designed to strengthen the agency’s position during litigation or settlement negotiations.
Some observers have also raised concerns that if Danielle were to lose the case, the debt could become a so-called “non-cancellable liability,” meaning it could not be erased through personal rehabilitation or bankruptcy and could follow her for life. Legal experts have pushed back against this claim, calling it a fear-based narrative. In order for a debt to be classified as non-repayable, it must be demonstrated that an intentional and malicious wrongful act has been committed, a legal threshold that is exceptionally difficult to reach in exclusive contract disputes.
Ultimately, many believe the case will likely end with a significant court-ordered reduction or a settlement reached before a final ruling. On December 30, ADOR officially filed a lawsuit for damages seeking approximately ₩43.1 billion against Danielle and former CEO Min Hee-jin. While the agency has stated its intent to pursue liability to the bitter end, the reduced amount appears to reflect a more realistic assessment of what could be sustained in court.
Sources: Daum, Nate
