Danielle, ADOR clash over price tag of Min Hee-jin's impact

[K-pop Courtroom]

How much would NewJeans have earned in the absence of the girl group’s architect, former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin?

The question again took center stage in the ongoing legal battle between ADOR and former NewJeans member Danielle at a heated courtroom.

The sixth hearing of the lawsuit filed by the HYBE label seeking 33.1 billion won ($25 million) in penalties and damages from Danielle, a family member of hers and Min took place at the Seoul Central District Court in southern Seoul on Thursday.

The latest hearing centered on ADOR’s alleged financial losses during the roughly yearlong period between the members’ announcement in November 2024 that they were leaving the agency and the court’s ruling in favor of ADOR, upholding the validity of the contracts finalized in November last year.

On July 2, the court appointed an accounting expert to assess the losses using materials provided by ADOR.

The roughly 50-minute hearing opened with a sharp exchange as lawyers for the defendants accused ADOR of deliberately delaying proceedings by failing to submit materials requested for the assessment.

“The plaintiff is blatantly delaying the proceedings,” a lawyer for the defendants said. “It delayed submitting the materials requested on Aug. 4 under the pretext of protecting trade secrets […] When the expert requested additional materials on Oct. 11, five of the 18 items requested two months earlier were still missing. They said the materials were ready and then only submitted some of them yesterday evening after the omissions were pointed out on Oct. 19.”

The lawyer added that “We can no longer trust any of its promises because of the delays, “ and urged the court to set a firm deadline for the expert’s report.

ADOR denied deliberately delaying proceedings, saying it had submitted the available materials, including business plans and details of projects that would have proceeded had the members not announced their departure.

Discussing the materials needed for the assessment, the judge identified a central question: How to account for Min’s contribution when calculating what NewJeans could have earned for ADOR?

The judge outlined two approaches to calculating losses: estimating potential earnings while accounting for Min’s absence, and examining losses from individual projects or advertising campaigns that did not proceed.

“Not every contract for the following year’s activities could have been signed in advance, so it is impossible to identify specific contracts one by one,” ADOR’s lawyer said, yet maintained that advertising contracts had fallen through because Danielle and the other members had not fulfilled them.

“It could not have been just one or two advertising contracts that fell through — almost all of them did,” the lawyer said.

ADOR’s legal team also refuted the suggestion that Min’s absence would have eliminated the group’s revenue.

“It is difficult to accept the argument that the members could generate zero amount of money without Min,” its lawyer said. “For an act as established as NewJeans, the artists and their agency are important. A single executive producer does not determine everything.”

ADOR’s representatives said the expert had requested revenue figures for girl group Le Sserafim, which they could not provide, and that they were discussing alternative materials with the expert.

The defendants, on the other hand, countered that Min’s creative contribution was irreplaceable and could not be quantified in K-pop production, unlike other industries like manufacturing, making the proposed assessment of potential revenue inappropriate from the first places.

“We have maintained from beginning that this assessment is impossible because Min is irreplaceable and her creative value cannot be quantified,” the lawyer said. “There is no substitute for Min, so this is fundamentally different from valuing a manufacturing business. Yet the assessment is ongoing. Unfortunately, we believe the expert lacks the expertise to quantify Min’s value, and that doing so is practically impossible.”

Another point of contention was whether ADOR was seeking to hold Danielle accountable for losses arising from all five members’ departure or only those attributable to her own alleged breach of contract. ADOR said it would clarify the scope of its claim against her after receiving the expert’s assessment.

As Danielle’s lawyers repeatedly criticized the delays and pressed for a submission deadline, the court cautioned against excessive pressure on the expert. It said it would check the expert’s progress and expected completion date, with the aim of obtaining the report before Nov. 10.

The next hearing is scheduled for Nov. 12.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, two days before the hearing, Danielle uploaded a video to her personal YouTube channel, which included footage from last year that suggested other NewJeans members were present outside the frame.

BY SHIN HA-NEE [[email protected]]