Min Hee-jin: “Serious wrapping of a mere anecdote” vs. HYBE: “A plan involving third parties”
The claims between HYBE and Min Hee-jin, CEO of ADOR, are becoming increasingly polarized. HYBE has countered Min’s claims as distortions through a press release on the 26th, rebutting twelve statements.
Conversely, a tearful Min Hee-jin declared she’s been wronged during a press conference held on the 25th. She emotionally criticized HYBE for about two hours, mixing tears with harsh words.
1. Was it just a joke about usurping management rights?
Min Hee-jin: “Anyone could be framed like this by simply taking a screenshot of a KakaoTalk message out of context. I’m really curious about the real intent behind portraying a casual conversation as something grave.”
HYBE: “The discussions have been documented over several months, involving third parties, transitioning from casual conversations to planned actions. Furthermore, the counterpart in these conversations, an Executive Vice President, holds expert knowledge in corporate governance and has been involved in HYBE’s IPO and numerous M&As.”
2. Was the financial compensation insufficient?
Min Hee-jin: “It appears I’m well-compensated by HYBE, right? There are rumors I received 5 billion won in incentives last year, but it was actually 2 billion won. Ji-won Park received 1 billion won despite negative performance.”
HYBE: “Min Hee-jin’s annual salary and long-term incentives are set separately, placing her at the top of our pay scale not just within HYBE headquarters but across all our Korean subsidiaries.”
3. Was there an audit following Min Hee-jin’s whistleblower email?
Min Hee-jin: “I hoped that raising the issue formally would lead to improvements. Instead, there was no direct response; the audit was their reply.”
HYBE: “Our response, a detailed six-page letter, was sent and acknowledged by Min Hee-jin on the same day it was sent. The audit was a necessary response to several months of potential usurpation of management rights through internal and external leaks.”
4. Was Min Hee-jin unfairly asked to return company assets?
Min Hee-jin: “Why should I suffer losses because of HYBE? They are accusing me of not submitting my PC, but the request only came yesterday, before which articles had already surfaced.”
HYBE: “The retrieval of information assets was part of our auditing process, with multiple attempts to contact Min Hee-jin via phone, email, and messages. So the claims of unawareness and forced retrieval are baseless and irresponsible.”
5. Was NewJeans initially intended to debut as HYBE’s first girl group?
Min Hee-jin: “When Ji-won Park took office in July 2021, suddenly I was told that NewJeans would be debuting under Source Music. I didn’t even know that Sakura and Kim Chae-won had been recruited.”
HYBE: “Despite Min Hee-jin’s claims, HYBE had agreed to her request to form and debut the team under her own label, ADOR, supporting her with substantial funding.”
6. Did HYBE hinder the promotion of NewJeans?
Min Hee-jin: “Ji-won Park asked me to refrain from promoting NewJeans until LE SSERAFIM debuted. This was to create confusion and blend NewJeans into Min Hee-jin’s girl group. Despite the hindrances, I decided to fight back.”
HYBE: “The delay in NewJeans’ debut was due to ongoing R&R disputes between Source Music and Min Hee-jin, not because of promotional restrictions imposed by HYBE.”
7. Was there a lack of promotion for NewJeans?
Min Hee-jin: “The mothers of the NewJeans members had complaints against Source Music and HYBE. There was a three to four-month promotion boycott.”
HYBE: “This claim contradicts the efforts and support provided by HYBE, as evidenced by the extensive PR campaigns run for NewJeans compared to other groups.”
8. Was Min Hee-jin’s contract with HYBE akin to a ‘slave contract’?
Min Hee-jin: “I’m tied down by a peculiar shareholder agreement with HYBE so unable to sell a locked 5% stake, resembling a slave contract.”
HYBE: “The non-compete clause is a common provision to prevent unfair competition post-shareholding. Min Hee-jin will be able to sell her shares and start a new business post-2026, reflecting a highly advantageous financial agreement rather than a ‘slave contract’.”
9. HYBE’s ESG management practices?
Min Hee-jin: “Calling an album ‘melting’ is just wordplay because all paper melts. The industry should produce fewer albums to reduce the burden on fans.”
HYBE: “HYBE is committed to ESG principles, shifting album materials to more sustainable options, a move not fully supported by ADOR.”
10. Did HYBE attempt dialogue with Min Hee-jin?
Min Hee-jin: “If they had reached out, I would have responded, given the implications for NewJeans. Instead, I felt forced to play my hand with a whistleblower claim.”
HYBE: “Despite ongoing discussions, Min Hee-jin’s claims and actions, seemingly aimed at usurping management, led to the necessity of an audit, independent of her whistleblower claims.”
Conclusion
The complex dispute between HYBE and Min Hee-jin continues to unfold, with each party presenting conflicting accounts and evidence. The situation remains fluid, with new developments likely to emerge as both parties stand firm in their positions.
Reference: https://m.entertain.naver.com/article/433/0000103823
One response to ““Who’s Lying?” – HYBE vs. Min Hee-jin, a Clash of Rebuttals”
[…] “Who’s Lying?” – HYBE vs. Min Hee-jin, a Clash of Rebuttals https://kpopwave.tech/whos-lying-hybe-vs-min-hee-jin-a-clash-of-rebuttals/ […]