On October 30, 2025, the conflict between former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin and HYBE, which had shaken the K-pop industry, reached another significant turning point. This was the first trial ruling on the validity of the exclusive contract between NewJeans members and ADOR, which concluded with ADOR's victory. As a result, the NewJeans members confirmed the validity of their contract with ADOR, and their independent activities were put on hold. This incident goes beyond a simple internal corporate dispute, revealing the structural problems of the entire K-pop industry, the role of creators, and the limitations of the multi-label system, sparking ongoing discussions.
The conflict began in April 2024 when HYBE raised suspicions that former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin was attempting to take over ADOR's management. HYBE claimed that Min had contacted outside forces to sell ADOR's shares and become independent. On the other hand, former CEO Min Hee-jin strongly denied this, claiming that HYBE conducted a retaliatory audit after she raised issues about the new girl group ILLIT, from HYBE's subsidiary label Belift Lab, copying NewJeans' concept and choreography. In this first trial ruling, the court did not accept the NewJeans side's claim of a 'breakdown of trust due to Min Hee-jin's dismissal' and instead pointed out that the actions of the former CEO could be judged as 'preparatory work' for creating negative public opinion towards HYBE.
This dispute revealed the structural limitations of the multi-label system, which had been considered the core growth engine of the K-pop industry. HYBE built a multi-label system operating several labels as subsidiaries to reduce its reliance on BTS's success and secure various artist IPs. However, former CEO Min Hee-jin sought to pursue NewJeans' unique planning and branding at the independent label ADOR, and in this process, she clashed with the parent company HYBE's centralized control. The conflict between the autonomy of creators and the controllable creativity of large capital is raising fundamental questions that the K-pop industry is facing.
After the dismissal of former CEO Min Hee-jin, the NewJeans members attempted to terminate their exclusive contracts with ADOR and sought independent activities, claiming a 'breakdown of trust with the new management.' They even showed a new move by changing their activity name to 'NJZ.' However, the court did not accept the claims of the NewJeans members and ruled that the contract with ADOR was valid, once again confirming the legal standards for the reasons for termination of an artist's contract and the special characteristics of entertainment contracts. In particular, the court's judgment that it is not possible to view the exercise of content production decision-making power after accumulating a sufficient fandom as 'forced exclusive activities' or 'violation of personality rights,' considering the nature of management contracts where large sums of investment are made before debut and must be recovered upon success, is expected to set an important precedent for future artist contract disputes. Meanwhile, former CEO Min Hee-jin recently established a new planning company called 'OOAK,' and attention is focused on her future actions.
This Min Hee-jin-HYBE conflict is having a multi-layered impact on the K-pop industry. First, it raises the need to strengthen corporate governance transparency. A clear understanding of and transparent operation of complex shareholding structures and rights, such as shareholder agreements and put options, have become more important. Second, it calls for the reorganization of the multi-label system. Unlike the ideal model that pursues synergy and independence between labels, the actual operation has shown that problems such as management interference, intensified internal competition, and concept similarities can occur. This suggests the need for a delicate system design that can ensure the true autonomy of each label while coordinating the direction of the parent company.
Third, there will be a redefinition of the rights and responsibilities of creators. The case of former CEO Min Hee-jin simultaneously shows the influence of star producers and the limitations of their responsibilities. Answers must be found on how the two values, the creator's vision and the company's profit pursuit, can be balanced. Fourth, it can accelerate the change in the artist-agency relationship. The situation in which the NewJeans members supported the former CEO and demanded contract termination shows the complex dynamics between the artist's subjectivity and their reliance on the agency. In the future, artists will assert their rights more actively, and agencies will need to build more flexible and mutually respectful relationships.
The Min Hee-jin-HYBE conflict can be seen as part of the growing pains that K-pop is experiencing in its journey to becoming a global industry. It is also analyzed as an event that symbolically revealed the structural contradictions of the industry and the crisis of creative autonomy. Through this incident, the K-pop industry should build a more transparent and fair system and seek ways to maintain a stable business model while respecting the originality of creators. This is an essential process for K-pop to establish itself as sustainable cultural content beyond a temporary trend.
Q1: What were the core issues in the conflict between Min Hee-jin and HYBE?
A1: HYBE claimed that former CEO Min Hee-jin was attempting to take over ADOR's management, and former CEO Min Hee-jin denied this and countered that it was a retaliatory audit for raising the issue of ILLIT copying NewJeans. The validity of the exclusive contracts of NewJeans members was also a major issue.
Q2: What was the result of the first trial ruling on the NewJeans exclusive contract lawsuit on October 30, 2025?
A2: The Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of ADOR in the lawsuit filed by ADOR against the NewJeans members to confirm the validity of their exclusive contracts. As a result, the validity of the NewJeans members' contracts with ADOR was confirmed.
Q3: How does this conflict affect the K-pop multi-label system?
A3: Despite the advantages of the multi-label system, such as securing diversity and diversifying risk, the lack of communication between the parent company and the labels, management interference, intensified internal competition, and infringement of creative autonomy were highlighted. This raises the need for K-pop agencies to reorganize the multi-label system and establish more transparent governance.
Q4: What is expected for the future actions of former CEO Min Hee-jin?
A4: Former CEO Min Hee-jin recently established a new entertainment agency called 'OOAK.' Although the ruling confirmed that the exclusive contracts of the NewJeans members with ADOR are valid, it is noteworthy what impact her new agency will have on the K-pop market in the future.
Reference:
* HYBE Official Website
0