The legal battle between HYBE Labels and former Ador CEO Min Hee-jin has entered a new phase.
After a Seoul court ordered HYBE to pay Min approximately 25.5 billion won (around $17.5 million) in a put option dispute, the company has now formally appealed the ruling — ensuring the fight is far from over.
Here’s how we got here, what the court actually decided, and what it means for NewJeans and the wider K-pop industry.
The Appeal: What Changed This Week?
According to legal sources, HYBE filed a notice of appeal with Civil Division 31 of the Seoul Central District Court on Feb. 19, the day after the first-instance ruling. The case was presided over by Judge Nam In-soo.
In the original decision, the court dismissed HYBE’s lawsuit over the Shareholders Agreement (SHA) and ruled:
-
HYBE must pay approximately 25.5 billion won to Min
-
Around 1.7 billion won to former Ador vice president Shin
-
About 1.4 billion won to former Ador director Kim
HYBE’s appeal signals it will continue challenging the validity of Min’s put option and the court’s interpretation of the SHA.
How the Dispute Started
The lawsuit began in July 2024, when HYBE terminated the SHA, claiming that Min had attempted to privatize NewJeans and Ador and had caused damage to the company and its subsidiary labels.
In August 2024, Min was dismissed as Ador CEO. She later resigned from her role as Ador executive director and notified HYBE that she was exercising her put option.
HYBE countered that the put option was ineffective because the SHA had already been terminated in July.
That disagreement — whether the contract was lawfully terminated — became the central issue.
What Is a Put Option — and Why Does It Matter?
A put option allows a shareholder, under specific conditions, to require another shareholder to purchase their shares at a pre-agreed price.
In this case, the put option was a key component of the SHA between Min and HYBE.
Under the agreement, if Min exercised the option, she would be entitled to roughly 26 billion won. The amount was calculated as:
-
13 times Ador’s average operating profit over the previous two fiscal years
-
Multiplied by 75% of her equity stake in Ador
In short: the payout formula was built into the contract.
The legal question wasn’t about the math — it was about whether Min’s actions constituted a “material breach of obligations” severe enough to invalidate the agreement entirely.
What the Court Actually Said
The court ruled in Min’s favour.
It held that HYBE’s grounds for terminating the SHA — based on allegations that Min attempted to seize management control — did not amount to a “material breach of obligations.”
The judges noted:
“It appears that former CEO Min explored options for making ADOR independent by meeting with external investors, but all of this was premised on HYBE’s approval,” adding, “No legal effect could arise without HYBE’s consent.”
In other words, even if discussions about independence occurred, they did not automatically translate into unlawful action or contractual violation.
View this post on Instagram
The court also rejected HYBE’s attempt to terminate the SHA and upheld put option claims from other former Ador executives. Because both lawsuits centered on the validity of the same contract, the court consolidated the proceedings.
The ILLIT Question and Creative Speech
Judges also examined whether Min’s public criticism — including her claims about similarities between NewJeans and rookie group ILLIT from HYBE affiliate Belift Lab — constituted a contractual violation.
While the court noted the alleged similarities did not rise to the level of plagiarism, it concluded that raising such concerns was a legitimate expression of a producer’s opinion rather than a breach of contract.
Read more: BTS To Livestream ‘The Comeback Live Arirang’ Seoul Concert On Netflix Ahead of Documentary
“What this ruling does is separate corporate control from a producer’s ability to speak up on creative issues,” said a public relations company executive, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It suggests the court recognized that artistic judgment needs space to exist in K-pop, even within large corporate structures.”
That distinction could have broader implications for how creative directors within large entertainment conglomerates navigate internal disputes.
What This Means for NewJeans
The ruling does not alter the validity of NewJeans members’ exclusive contracts with Ador.
After losing a separate lawsuit in October 2025 seeking termination of those agreements, members have taken different paths. Hanni, Haerin and Hyein have returned to Ador, while Minji has yet to publicly clarify her position.
Still, some industry observers say the ruling could influence negotiations surrounding the group’s future activities.
“The ruling doesn’t change the contracts on paper, but it could definitely change the negotiating atmosphere,” said an industry insider from a midsized entertainment label, who asked not to be named.
“If the artists themselves, along with the general public, interpret the decision as validation, it could influence how future talks unfold,” they added.
What Happens Next?
For HYBE, the appeal ensures the legal battle will continue. Additional lawsuits involving damages and defamation remain ongoing, including a separate damages case reportedly worth roughly 43.1 billion won.
For Min, the ruling strengthens her legal position as she pivots toward her independent label, Ooak Records, where she has begun early branding work tied to a planned boy group debut.
Read more: NewJeans Erases Ousted Member Danielle From Official Platforms
“The next phase will not be defined by legal rulings alone,” said the anonymous executive. “It will depend on whether Min, who already secures significant brand value in K-pop, can establish a new narrative without the backing of big labels, and whether HYBE can stabilize its already shaky public perception.”
The court may have clarified the contract — but the power struggle over creative control, corporate authority and NewJeans’ future is still unfolding.
