Source Music v. Min Hee-jin: 3rd Hearing

2025-08-22 ← Back to List

The 12th Civil Division of the Seoul Western District Court held the third hearing in the 500 million won damages lawsuit filed by Source Music against the former CEO.

The Court:

Officially recognized the admissibility of the KakaoTalk conversations as evidence and admitted them into the record.

“It is difficult to consider the submitted KakaoTalk conversations as constituting a violation of the Protection of Communications Secrets Act. Considering various circumstances, including the sharing of passwords, the admissibility of this evidence can be recognized.”

The court announced that the trial would proceed through oral arguments in open court, without public presentations.

Min Hee-jin’s Side:

Immediately objected to the recognition of the KakaoTalk evidence, arguing that reading the contents of the conversations in open court is inappropriate.

“The confidentiality of communications is a constitutional right. It is inappropriate to specifically cite the contents of conversations in open court.”

“Reading them aloud specifically during oral arguments would effectively have the same result.”

The Court:

Rejected Min Hee-jin’s side’s argument, emphasizing that ‘open hearings’ are a principle under the Civil Procedure Act.

“Under the Civil Procedure Act, hearings are in principle open to the public. If objections are raised during the proceedings, the court will rule on them according to legal procedures.”

“It is difficult to accept the argument that citations should be blocked in advance.”

Source Music’s Side:

Countered that Min Hee-jin’s side’s argument violates principles of fairness and equality of arms.

“There is precedent where the former CEO invited media outlets and read KakaoTalk messages aloud for nearly two hours while criticizing the other party.”

“The KakaoTalk conversations have already been admitted as evidence by the court. Citing them is merely the exercise of legitimate argument rights, and it is simply a matter for the defendant to rebut.”

The Court:

Stated that it cannot restrict in advance what will be said in future hearings, and scheduled the next hearing for November 7.