In the first hearing of a $431 million damages lawsuit filed by Adore against former NewJeans member Daniel and former Adore CEO Min Hee-jin, both sides clashed over delays in the proceedings. The court rejected Adore's request to change the hearing date and proceeded as scheduled.
The Seoul Central District Court's Civil Division 31, presided over by Judge Nam In-soo, held the initial hearing on May 14. Neither Daniel nor Min attended, with only their legal representatives present in court.
Adore recently appointed a new legal representative, Lee Han Law Firm, after the previous firm, Kim & Jang, resigned. Following this change, Adore submitted a request to reschedule the hearing on May 8, which the court denied.
During the hearing, a dispute arose regarding whether Adore had submitted its plan for proving damages. The court had previously required Adore to submit evidence by April 30, but the submission was not made by the deadline.
Adore's representative apologized for the failure to submit the plan but insisted there was no intention to delay the case. They argued that the plaintiff also seeks a prompt resolution and that the proceedings should not restrict the plaintiff's ability to prove their case.
In contrast, Daniel's side argued, "After four months of litigation, they changed their legal representation and are trying to restart the case, which seems to waste Daniel's prime time as an idol on legal disputes." They claimed that Adore is targeting only Daniel among NewJeans members with this substantial lawsuit, suggesting an ulterior motive to intimidate other members into compliance.
Min's side also criticized the delay in submitting the proof plan while changing representatives, calling it a malicious act that harms the defendants' lives, and requested sanctions from the court.
In response, Adore's representatives stated, "We have never interfered with Daniel's activities or had disagreements regarding them," arguing that it is contradictory to claim interference while filing a lawsuit based on contract termination.
Daniel's side requested that the trials be separated for each defendant, noting that the legal responsibilities regarding Daniel involve contract violations, while those concerning Daniel's family and Min relate to joint illegal acts, indicating different legal structures.
The court stated it would decide on the separation of trials at a later date and reiterated its request for Adore to submit the proof plan and witness requests by June 2. The next hearing is scheduled for June 11 at 2 PM.
One of the key issues in this lawsuit is the concept of "tampering." The court noted that tampering is a term closely related to industry practices and indicated the need to examine whether it can be immediately classified as illegal. Both sides were asked to submit lower court precedents and international cases from similar industries for review.
Adore filed the lawsuit in December after notifying Daniel of the termination of his exclusive contract, seeking damages, including penalties, totaling $431 million. Previously, on April 30, the court ruled in favor of Adore in a case confirming the validity of the exclusive contract.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.