ADOR v. NewJeans: Lawsuit to Confirm Validity of Exclusive Contract – 3rd Hearing

The third hearing in the exclusive contract validity lawsuit filed by ADOR against the NewJeans members (Minji, Hanni, Danielle, Haerin, and Hyein) was held before the 41st Civil Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Jung Hoe-il).

Emphasized that it is undeniable that NewJeans achieved great success thanks to HYBE’s full support. Based on this support and success, attempting to unilaterally terminate the exclusive contract just two years after debut violates the principle of good faith and therefore cannot be permitted.

This situation was orchestrated by Min Hee-jin, who had been planning to take NewJeans away for three years. KakaoTalk messages between Min Hee-jin, external parties, and former ADOR executives confirmed specific prior collusion regarding contract termination, raising plagiarism allegations against ILLIT, and strategies for waging a public opinion campaign.

Given that the timing of the members’ contract termination claims coincides with Min Hee-jin’s public statements, Min Hee-jin is also behind this lawsuit. The contract termination notice sent by NewJeans was also drafted by Min Hee-jin’s legal representatives.

The KakaoTalk evidence that the opposing side (Shin & Kim) claims was “selectively edited” was not illegally obtained. The data was forensically extracted from company-owned devices, and HYBE’s audit was a legitimate process conducted after discovering signs of prior collusion.

Has provided NewJeans with the best opportunities for entertainment activities. Revenue settlements have been conducted transparently, with over 5 billion won paid to each member.

ADOR is still preparing for NewJeans’ comeback, and all ADOR employees are waiting for their return. Therefore, ADOR has fulfilled its obligations as an agency, and the exclusive contract remains valid.

Won the final ruling in the injunction application for “preservation of agency status.” According to the court’s ruling, NewJeans must prove grounds for contract termination, but they have proven nothing.

Rather, it is being proven that there are no grounds for contract termination, and the court has also determined that the contract cannot be terminated based on unilateral claims alone. Criticized the grounds for termination claimed by NewJeans (Min Hee-jin’s dismissal → Hanni’s HR issue → psychological stress) as inconsistent and legally untenable.

ADOR had prepared various plans including a full-length album, but delays caused by NewJeans’ actions have been acknowledged by the court.

If the contract is maintained, NewJeans can continue their entertainment activities at the highest level. They can shed the stigma of being “artists who don’t keep their promises” and be freed from massive penalty fees and damages liability.

Damages to NewJeans: Would lose ADOR and HYBE’s full support, suffer damage to their idol image, and become embroiled in legal disputes over penalty fees and damages.

Damages to ADOR: Would lose all investment returns and brand image, threatening the very existence of the company, making it difficult to maintain employee jobs. Claimed that the court has also acknowledged these losses.

Such a precedent would have a devastating impact on the entire K-pop industry. Agencies like ADOR would no longer be able to nurture new talent, potentially leading to the collapse of the K-pop ecosystem. In conclusion, NewJeans’ existence is necessary for the members themselves, ADOR, and the entire K-pop industry.

The beginning of all events was HYBE’s surprise audit in April 2024, during what had been a peaceful period ahead of a comeback. HYBE claimed “management rights usurpation,” but the “tempering” (attempting to take NewJeans away) that served as the key basis was not included in the grounds for dismissing CEO Min Hee-jin at the time.

The true motive for the audit was retaliation against CEO Min Hee-jin for sending a letter raising the issue of ILLIT copying NewJeans, claiming it was “obviously an audit with a predetermined conclusion.” Even if the audit “procedures” were lawful, this does not mean the audit “grounds” were legitimate.

There was no protection for the members during the audit process, with HYBE consistently taking the stance of “stay out of the adults’ fight and just keep doing what you were doing.”

The members signed the contract because they believed in ADOR under CEO Min Hee-jin’s leadership. The current ADOR has not only expelled Min Hee-jin and filled positions with HYBE executives, but has also lost its actual support capabilities as key creative personnel at the team leader level and above who collaborated with Dolphiners Films have left en masse.

HYBE gaslit the members by disparaging them as “mindless individuals manipulated by Min Hee-jin,” completely destroying the trust relationship. Explained that “just as a phone with the same hardware is no longer the same phone if you change the SIM card, the ADOR we trusted is no longer the same, so we can no longer trust them with our careers.”

The members were neglected during the conflict between HYBE and Min Hee-jin and suffered the greatest damage, currently trapped in a “holistic dilemma.” They are experiencing severe psychological distress “to the point of heart palpitations just from being near the office building and needing treatment for depression.”

To members in this state, the current ADOR management has consistently taken a formal and high-handed attitude of “it’s a contract, so come back,” disregarding their personal rights. Through their petition, the members appealed that “telling us to return to ADOR and HYBE is like telling a school bullying victim to go back to school and endure it.”

Police Decision Not to Prosecute: Argued that the police’s decision “not to prosecute Min Hee-jin for breach of fiduciary duty” after a lengthy and thorough investigation serves as a superior basis for judgment compared to the injunction decision made quickly without evidence examination.

Selectively Edited KakaoTalk Messages: The KakaoTalk messages presented as evidence of management rights usurpation were nothing more than playful conversations like “I’m going to be president when I grow up,” and the police also did not view this as breach of fiduciary duty.

Intentional Image Damage: Claimed that HYBE intentionally damaged the members’ image by initiating the audit five days before comeback, releasing 1,700 articles, and framing them as “betrayal idols.”

Hanni CCTV Incident: Criticized that HYBE selectively deleted only the CCTV footage of unfavorable scenes to “make Hanni look like a liar,” questioning “why did the CCTV footage of the actual problematic scenes happen to disappear?”

Core Legal Argument: Emphasized the special nature of exclusive contracts, citing case law to argue that “breakdown of trust” should be treated as a separate ground for termination from general “material breach of contractual obligations.”

Inevitability of Mentioning Min Hee-jin: Explained that mentioning CEO Min Hee-jin in the arguments was an inevitable choice to explain the background and harm that led the members to their current situation.

Made clear that their position is not unconditional refusal to return. The place the members cannot return to is merely the “current ADOR” that has been taken over by HYBE and has lost its core capabilities.

Stated “if it returns to the ADOR we trusted and relied on, we would go even if told not to,” requesting that a path be opened to restore ADOR to what it was before April 2024 when they worked with CEO Min Hee-jin.

Designated August 14, 2025 as a closed mediation date and decided to conduct direct mediation.

Requested the attendance of the NewJeans members, who are parties to the lawsuit, along with the preparation of a mediation proposal.

Designated October 30, 2025 at 9:50 AM as the verdict date.