Min Hee-jin Wins Lawsuit Against HYBE Over Shareholder Agreement Dispute

Min Hee-jin, former CEO of ADOR, has won the first trial in a lawsuit concerning a shareholder agreement with HYBE. The court ruled that while Min sought independence from ADOR, it did not constitute a significant breach of contract.

On the morning of the 12th, the Seoul Central District Court's Civil Agreement Division 31 (Chief Judge Nam In-soo) ruled in favor of Min in the lawsuit filed by HYBE to confirm the termination of the shareholder agreement and in Min's countersuit for stock purchase payment.

The court ordered HYBE to pay Min approximately 25.5 billion KRW (around $260 million USD). As a result of this ruling, Min can exercise her put option to receive the stock purchase payment from HYBE. The put option payment is calculated based on ADOR's average operating profit over the past two years and Min's shareholding ratio.

The court acknowledged evidence from KakaoTalk conversations indicating that Min explored ways to weaken HYBE's control over ADOR and independently manage the company. However, it concluded that this did not amount to a significant breach of contract.

Regarding the KakaoTalk evidence submitted by HYBE, the court noted that Min's discussions assumed HYBE's consent for any independent actions, rendering them ineffective without such approval.

The case began in July 2024 when HYBE notified Min of contract termination, citing her attempts to privatize ADOR and resulting company damages. Min was dismissed from her CEO position in August of the same year and resigned as an internal director in November, simultaneously notifying her intention to exercise the put option.

HYBE argued that Min actively sought and implemented plans to independently control ADOR, citing KakaoTalk messages and internal documents as evidence of her attempts to induce contract termination with NewJeans members and their parents. They claimed this destroyed trust between major shareholders, justifying contract termination and invalidating the put option exercise.

In contrast, Min's side refuted any contract violations, arguing that HYBE manipulated private conversations to fabricate scenarios of share seizure or management takeover, with no actual investor contact or execution of plans.