This is an AI translated post.
Min Hee-jin, CEO of ADOR, vs. HYBE, Entering Legal Battle! The Key Issue is 'Embezzlement'
- Writing language: Korean
- •
-
Base country: All countries
- •
- Economy
0000-00-00 00:00:00
Select Language
Summarized by durumis AI
- HYBE is arguing that Min Hee-jin embezzled funds, and is trying to set the share sale price at face value. Min Hee-jin is attempting to sell her shares for up to 100 billion won by exercising her put option.
- HYBE holds 80% of ADOR shares, so Min's removal is expected at a special shareholders' meeting. Min Hee-jin denies the embezzlement charges, claiming that investment acquisition was aimed at increasing the company's value.
- If Min Hee-jin is acquitted, she could claim damages from HYBE and demand payment for the remainder of her term. HYBE is planning to investigate other illegal activities by Min Hee-jin.
Min Hee-jin, CEO of ADOR, and HYBE's conflict has turned into a legal battle.
[Key Point] The amount of money Min will receive for selling her shares depends on whether she is found guilty of breach of trust.
HYBE accused Min of attempting to seize control of the company and filed a complaint against her for breach of trust.
🏴☠️ Guilty If convicted: HYBE will purchase Min's shares at face value (3 billion won).
🏳️ Not Guilty If convicted: Min can sell her shares for up to 100 billion won by exercising her put option.
[Current Status] HYBE is expected to remove Min through an extraordinary shareholder meeting.
HYBE owns 80% of ADOR's shares, so Min can be dismissed with the majority shareholder's vote.
The management change is expected to take about two months.
[Issue] Did Min actually commit breach of trust?
HYBE's Argument : Min planned to attract external investors to make ADOR independent and take away NewJeans.
Min's Argument : Attracting investment was a discussion to increase the company's value, and there was no intention to take away NewJeans.
📢 Legal Judgment : Breach of trust is based on whether there was an attempt to commit the crime, so simply contacting external investors is not enough to constitute breach of trust.
[Key Variables] HYBE's ability to prove damages to ADOR and HYBE
Breach of trust requires proof of damages to the company, but due to the contents of the shareholder agreement, HYBE may be able to prove damages.
HYBE's Argument : Min stole financial data and artist contract data, causing damage to HYBE.
🏳️ If Min is found not guilty : Min could sue HYBE for damages and demand payment of the remaining term of her salary.
[Future Prospects] Min could face long-term conflict even if she is found not guilty.
🏳️ If Min is found not guilty : Min could sue HYBE claiming that 'she was dismissed through a shareholder meeting resolution without a justifiable reason'
Min could file a 'confirmation of the invalidity of the shareholder meeting resolution' or a 'provisional injunction to confirm her position as a director.'
HYBE : HYBE plans to investigate other illegal acts by Min besides breach of trust.
