Court Rules In Min Hee Jin’s Favor In Lawsuit Involving HYBE + Ordered To Pay Close To $18 Million In Damages
The court ruled in favor of former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin in the lawsuit related to the termination of the shareholder agreement and the exercise of a put option between HYBE and Min Hee Jin, and also determined that her claims regarding allegations that ILLIT plagiarized NewJeans and the so-called “pushing out” claims constituted legitimate issues raised.
On the 12th of February, the Seoul Central District Court Civil Agreement Division 31 (Presiding Judge Nam In Soo) dismissed HYBE’s lawsuit seeking confirmation of the termination of the shareholder agreement filed against Min Hee Jin and two others. The court also ruled in favor of Min Hee Jin’s side in the lawsuit filed by Min Hee Jin and two others against HYBE seeking payment for shares following the exercise of the put option.
The court ordered HYBE to pay 25.5 billion won [$17,766,204] to Min Hee Jin, as well as 1.7 billion won and 1.4 billion won respectively to former ADOR directors.
Regarding the similarity issue between ILLIT and NewJeans, the court stated, “According to the report, when looking at ILLIT’s performance immediately after debut, it was judged to be similar to NewJeans,” adding, “The parents of NewJeans also submitted a petition regarding the similarity, and it is difficult to view this as a mistake based on incorrect facts.” The court further pointed out, “Belift Lab failed to present sufficient additional evidence in response to the claim that they are not similar.”
The court also stated, “The raising of the copy issue regarding ILLIT appears to be justified,” adding that “the CEO of ADOR has a duty to protect NewJeans, which is ADOR’s core value.” It concluded that “Min’s actions can be seen as a managerial judgment aimed at protecting ADOR’s interests.”
Regarding the “pushing out” allegations, the court said, “It is judged that there are clues that raise suspicion.” However, it added that even though HYBE stated the matter was an individual employee’s judgment rather than company policy, “it is difficult to say they are free from management responsibility.”
Previously, in November 2024, Min Hee Jin notified HYBE of her intention to exercise the put option for her ADOR shares. However, HYBE had maintained that the effect of the put option was invalid, arguing that it had already notified the termination of the shareholder agreement forming the basis of the option in July of the same year.
Meanwhile, Min Hee Jin maintained that the termination of the agreement was unjust and could not be accepted, leading both sides to continue an intense legal dispute. During the proceedings, Min Hee Jin personally appeared in court three times for witness examination and denied allegations related to NewJeans tampering and attempts to seize management control.
HYBE has stated to media outlets that it plans on disputing the ruling.
What do you think of the ruling?
Source: (A)
