As of December 12, a petition titled “A Hearing and Legislative Supplement on the Legal Weaknesses Exposed by HYBE Social Disputes” has gathered over 40,000 signatures in the National Assembly’s public petitions committee.
The petition highlights the need for a hearing to address the legal shortcomings highlighted by HYBE’s social disputes. It also requires legislative changes or new laws where current regulations fall short. The petition seeks to get 50,000 signatures by December 15. In case of a positive outcome, the petition will be submitted to the competent commissions for examination and discussion.
The petitioner stated: “It is time for the various allegations regarding the management and operations of this company to be revealed. Through a fair and transparent hearing, we hope to fill legal gaps and create new laws to ensure that South Korea, as a nation governed by the rule of law, maintains adequate standards.”
The controversy follows NewJeans’ sudden announcement that it was terminating its contract with ADOR and HYBE during an emergency press conference held on November 28 in Gangnam, Seoul. Member Minji said: “ADOR and HYBE violated the terms of our contract, which is why we are terminating it. With the resolution the exclusivity lapses and our business will continue without problems. Therefore, we see no need for legal actions such as temporary injunctions.”
Regarding potential sanctions, member Haerin stressed: “We did not violate our exclusivity agreement and performed to the best of our ability. We therefore see no reason to pay fines. Instead, ADOR and HYBE’s contractual violations are the root of this situation and they must take responsibility for it.“
In this regard, ADOR argued that the exclusivity contract remains valid. The company expressed regret over the NewJeans press conference, stating: “It is unfortunate that they planned and executed a press conference on the termination of the contract without carefully examining our response to their content-certified letter. ADOR has not breached the contract and unilateral claims of breach of trust are not grounds for termination.”
NewJeans reaffirmed its position on December 6, stating: “ADOR cannot interfere or influence our activities. The exclusive contract expressly provides that we can terminate it if ADOR does not fulfill its contractual obligations.”
Source: Daum
