Min Heejin’s attempt to return as CEO of ADOR was officially rejected by the court despite her request for an injunction. After the ruling, HYBE CEO Lee Jae-sang highlighted the issue “normalization of ADOR” in a message sent to internal staff.
On October 29, following the court’s decision, HYBE CEO Lee Jae-sang addressed employees in a message, stating: “As you may have seen in the news, there was a court ruling today regarding the recent series of events. This marks a turning point in the confusion that has persisted for the past seven months and the direction to resolve various issues has become clearer.”
He continued, “I am well aware that our employees have endured this long period with feelings of shame and devastation. Through this incident, I realized once again that our employees, who did their best in their respective positions, are the pillars on which our company stands. I sincerely apologize and express my deepest gratitude to all of you.”
Furthermore, he added, “The company intends to move quickly to return ADOR to normalcy. We expect significant progress on the most crucial issue – the renewal of NewJeans’ manufacturing contract – in short order. While there will be many challenges in this process, as we have stated many times, our commitment to supporting NewJeans in becoming an even more globally recognized artist remains unchanged.” This statement clearly demonstrates HYBE’s unwavering dedication to supporting NewJeans.
Meanwhile, on October 29, the Seoul Central District Court rejected former CEO Min Hee-jin’s request for an injunction against HYBE over her appointment as CEO of ADOR. A dismissal means that the court has dismissed the case without the need for a ruling. In other words, the court ruled in favor of HYBE.
Previously, NewJeans agency ADOR fired former CEO Min Hee-jin during a board meeting on Aug. 27. The main reason for the dismissal was that the separation between production and management was in line with the interests of ADOR and the principles of the multi-label system. Min Hee-jin, refusing to accept it, filed an injunction against HYBE requesting his reappointment as CEO of ADOR. He requested the guarantee of his mandate as CEO as provided for in the shareholders’ agreement with HYBE. HYBE countered that the shareholder agreement had already been terminated due to Min Hee-jin’s liability, making his reappointment as CEO impossible.
During the injunction hearing held on October 11, Min Hee-jin’s side claimed that ▲HYBE had engaged in “reverse viral marketing” which denigrated Min Hee-jin and NewJeans and downplayed their achievements, and discriminatory treatment existed ▲Other labels under HYBE raised plagiarism charges against NewJeans. They also argued that there were no reasons to terminate the shareholders’ agreement and that, even if trust between the contracting parties had completely broken down, HYBE would be responsible. Min Hee-jin’s representatives stressed that failure to reappoint her as CEO of ADOR would hinder NewJeans’ entertainment business.
In response, HYBE countered that Min Hee-jin had carefully planned and actually attempted to take away NewJeans and ADOR. HYBE said they first discovered Min Hee-jin’s betrayal between February and March this year, and in April, with the consent of former ADOR Vice President Lee Sang-woo, they obtained evidence from computers that revealed the full scope of the plan. HYBE also claimed that Min Hee-jin’s side breached confidentiality obligations by providing reporters with the original shareholder agreement. They completely denied NewJeans’ accusations of plagiarism and reverse viral marketing.
The HYBE side stated: “Min Hee-jin probably thought that if NewJeans sided with her, HYBE would rather sell ADOR to Min Hee-jin’s side as requested rather than maintain an ADOR without NewJeans’ normal operations,” adding that, “In this regard, Min Hee-jin’s plan was not the product of reckless imagination, but of a carefully calculated approach.”
THE “procure” cLause, which requires shareholders to instruct directors to exercise voting rights and take certain actions, was also a key issue in this injunction application. While Min Hee-jin argued that HYBE should order ADOR’s directors to appoint her as CEO as the largest shareholder, HYBE countered that this was legally impossible based on numerous precedents and theories. HYBE also cited a document written by a lawyer from Sejong Legal, which represents Min Hee-jin, to refute her claims.
As a result, the court’s dismissal of the case and HYBE’s victory in this injunction make Min Hee-jin’s return as CEO of ADOR virtually impossible.
Source: Daum
