Thanks to the full transcript shared by Team Bunnies, here are the key details from the July 2 hearing that weren't covered in news articles or the fan account.

👨‍⚖️ JUDGE'S COMMENTS

1. Judge Accused ADOR of Performing for the Media

The judge questioned whether ADOR's evidence display was for the court or for the reporters. He told them to stop showing private conversations in open court and submit them in writing instead.

2. Judge Asked ADOR to Keep Explanations "Abstract"

When ADOR wanted to display Telegram messages, the judge told them to summarize rather than quote exact words. The judge wanted to protect privacy and prevent media leaks.

3. Judge Suggested Bank Records Instead of Complex Fact-Finding

Regarding the $175,000 EO claim, the judge suggested Danielle could just show her bank records instead of going through a lengthy overseas process. The judge offered a faster, simpler solution suggesting ADOR's claims might not require such complex procedures.

4. Judge Warned About "Anchoring Effect"

The judge warned that if an expert proposes a number first, it could bias everyone's thinking, even if the number is wrong. The judge is aware of psychological bias and wants to avoid being influenced by an arbitrary expert number.

5. Judge Asked: Can an Accountant Evaluate the "Min Hee-jin Effect"?

The judge questioned whether an accountant could quantify how much of NewJeans' success was due to MHJ's creative direction. This is a key issue: ADOR claims lost profits based on past success, but Danielle's side argues that success was tied to MHJ, who was already removed.

6. Judge Asked About "A Year and a Half Off" Promise

The judge noted that three mothers reportedly heard ADOR say the members would get "a year and a half off." If true, this could support Danielle's estoppel defense: ADOR made promises they later broke.

7. Judge Suggested Separating Danielle's Case

The judge said Danielle's case could be resolved separately from the other defendants. The judge wants to resolve Danielle's case quickly rather than wait for the others.

8. Judge on Trial Pace Disagreement

The judge noted that the two sides view the lawsuit from different timelines. Danielle's side sees it as starting in 2024, ADOR sees it as starting recently. This explains why Danielle is pushing for speed and why ADOR keeps asking for more time.

🟪 ADOR'S ARGUMENTS

9. ADOR's Witness Questions Were "Leading Questions"

The judge noted that ADOR's witness questions already contained the answers they wanted. The witness was essentially being told what to say, which weakens their credibility.

10. ADOR's Late Appraisal Application

ADOR submitted its appraisal application two weeks late and it consisted of just four lines. ADOR requested an appraisal to calculate damages but failed to submit it on time with any detail, supporting Danielle's argument that ADOR is delaying.

11. ADOR's "Consulting Fee" Claim - No Name Attached

ADOR claimed MHJ received a $500,000 consulting fee but couldn't definitively name the recipient. ADOR was guessing, they can't prove who actually got paid, weakening their tampering claim.

12. Witness Kim So-hyung Could Not Be Located

ADOR wanted to call the former head of their business team as a witness, but they couldn't even find her. ADOR can't produce their own former employees as witnesses.

13. AAO Contract Termination Still Not Complete

ADOR revealed that the AAO contract termination was still not complete as of June 2026. Months after the contract validity ruling, the matter remained unresolved.

14. ADOR's "Danielle Remained Silent" Claim

ADOR argued that Danielle's silence about the AAO contract made corrective action impossible. ADOR's argument is that corrective action requires voluntary cooperation, not just the agency's guidance.

15. ADOR's Evidence Is Fragmented

ADOR admitted that some parents cooperated while others didn't, so the evidence has been collected piece by piece. ADOR didn't have all the evidence at once, they're still collecting it, which supports Danielle's argument that ADOR is delaying.

16. ADOR's Relative Witness - Identity Not Disclosed

ADOR wanted to call a member's relative as a witness but refused to say who, citing media leaks. Danielle's side argued the application was too vague and shouldn't be allowed. The judge ordered ADOR to submit the identity confidentially.

🟨 DANIELLE'S SIDE ARGUMENTS

17. "Fundamental Premises Have Collapsed"

Danielle's lawyers argued that ADOR can't claim lost profits because the normal conditions (MHJ's leadership and all five members together) no longer existed and ADOR contributed to that collapse. ADOR can't claim damages for something that wasn't going to happen anyway.

18. "We Question What Practical Value There Is"

Danielle's lawyers questioned the value of ADOR's overseas fact-finding requests. They argue these requests are pointless and designed only to delay the trial.

19. "ADOR Knew About Most of These Facts During Prior Lawsuit"

Danielle's lawyers argued that ADOR already knew about most of the activities during the prior lawsuit. ADOR can't claim they only "discovered" these facts after the lawsuit ended.

20. "If Danielle Had Been Given the Same Opportunity"

Danielle's lawyers argued that ADOR helped other members correct issues but never gave Danielle the same chance and terminated her contract immediately. Danielle was treated differently from other members.

21. "ADOR Is Pursuing This for a Different Purpose"

Danielle's lawyers argued that ADOR's real purpose isn't justice, it's to make an example of Danielle and intimidate other artists. This is about control, not contract enforcement.

⚖️ PROCEDURAL DETAILS

22. Deadlines Set by the Judge

July 8/10: Submit appraisal applications

July 13: Judge to recommend an expert

July 23: Appraisal expert examination

September 10: Next hearing

The judge is pushing for a tight schedule despite ADOR's requests for more time.

23. ADOR's Lawyer Complained About Deadlines

ADOR's lawyer complained about deadlines, but the judge gave a firm response: "If they don't submit, there's nothing we can do."

24. 2024 vs. 2026 Revenue Dispute

The two sides disagree on which year's revenue should be used to calculate damages. ADOR wants to use 2026. Danielle's side argues 2024 is the proper reference point.

📋 ADDITIONAL CONTEXT

25. ADOR's Email to Emotional Oranges

ADOR emailed EO and received a response but claimed it "did not reflect the truth." ADOR didn't get the answer they wanted, so they're asking the court to do more fact-finding.

26. ADOR's Claims About Other Brands Not Responding

ADOR said overseas brands wouldn't respond to emails and even the court's formal request wouldn't get a response. ADOR admits they already tried and got nothing, undermining their argument that these requests are necessary.

27. What Evidence Has ADOR Actually Submitted?

ADOR has submitted some evidence (Telegram conversations, audio recordings, AAO contract, EO email correspondence), but key financial proof (bank statements, signed contracts) appears to be missing. ADOR has some evidence, but the most important financial proof is missing.

28. Danielle Performed Almost All Scheduled Activities After Termination

Danielle continued performing almost all scheduled activities after she believed the contract was terminated. She didn't abandon her obligations, contradicting ADOR's claim that she refused to cooperate.

29. The "Mothers Heard 'A Year and a Half Off'" Claim

Three mothers reportedly heard ADOR make this promise. This isn't just a rumor, multiple parents reportedly heard it, strengthening Danielle's estoppel argument.

30. AAO Contract Requires NewJeans to Provide ADOR Management Information

The AAO contract required NewJeans to share internal company information with an external party. This is why ADOR considers it a serious violation.

31. AAO Contract Protected MHJ's Shares

The contract included a provision prohibiting the sale or transfer of MHJ's shares.

32. The "Consulting Fee" Was Hidden in the Members' Contract

The $500,000 consulting fee was deliberately included in the members' contract to avoid legal scrutiny.

33. ADOR Asked the Court to Require Witness Attendance

ADOR requested that witnesses must attend if they don't properly submit a written response. ADOR wants to force witnesses to appear in person possibly because they fear written testimony wouldn't be as favorable.

34. AAO Contract and Bonnie Chan Woo - Key Details

ADOR revealed that Bonnie Chan Woo is the representative of AAO, the Cayman Islands company that signed an exclusive agreement with NewJeans. She is also the organizer of ComplexCon Hong Kong.

The contract was signed on September 25, 2025. After the October 2025 ruling, the returning members requested ADOR's cooperation in terminating it. ADOR initiated the process, but as of June 2026, the termination was still not complete. ADOR mentioned an email from Bonnie Chan regarding the termination, but the exact date of that email is not specified in the transcript.

The AAO contract also included an unusual provision prohibiting the sale or transfer of Min Hee-jin's ADOR shares.

Sources:

English Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HX4MjgMZ803gF0RKx\_JKin8iRPybhdE6SbSyh39q6v4/edit?usp=drivesdk

Korean transcript: https://report.teambunnies.info/courtrecords

A Korean Tokki who attended the July 2 hearing shared a live thread on X with detailed observations.

🟪 ADOR'S ARGUMENTS

🔺️ON EMOTIONAL ORANGES

▫️ ADOR claimed that because some production costs were invested in Emotional Oranges, exclusive entertainment activities had been conducted. This refers to the $175,000 investment ADOR alleges was made for Danielle's involvement with the band.

▫️ The judge asked: "Are you acknowledging that the filming was suspended?" ADOR replied: "I do not acknowledge it."

🔸️[Comparison note: This exchange was NOT reported in news articles. The articles just said ADOR claimed EO had invested $175,000, but didn't mention the judge's skepticism or ADOR's refusal to acknowledge the filming was halted.]

▫️ The judge suggested that instead of continuing with the same claim, ADOR should verify the account details.

🔸️[Comparison note: This detail was NOT in news articles. The fan reported the judge effectively told ADOR: "If you're saying money was spent, go get the actual bank records." The articles didn't mention the judge questioning the evidence this directly.]

▫️ The fan noted: "Elle Omega claimed it too, but since there wasn't really any solid evidence for any of it, I didn't include it."

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles reported the Omega and Elle Singapore claims as fact, but the fan says there was no solid evidence presented for them. This suggests the articles may have given more weight to these claims than the evidence supported.]

🔺️ON MIN HEE-JIN AND TAMPERING

▫️ ADOR claimed MHJ made contact with Chinese capital to tamper with NewJeans but the fan noted these were things already heard during last year's shareholder agreement trial arguments.

🔸️[Comparison note: This context was NOT in news articles. The articles presented the tampering claims as new evidence, but the fan pointed out they were actually old allegations from the shareholder dispute between HYBE and MHJ and the court ruled it didn't constitute a violation.]

▫️ ADOR moved on to MHJ's tampering claims after the Danielle related arguments seemed to wrap up.

🔺️ON COMPLEXCON AND CONSULTING FEES

▫️ ADOR mentioned a "consulting fee" at ComplexCon and suggested it was money meant for MHJ, effectively claiming tampering.

▫️ The fan commented: "If there was at least a name written, I wouldn't say anything lololol."

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles reported the $500,000 consulting fee as a specific figure, but the fan suggests ADOR was vague about who actually received it, implying the claim was speculative and not backed by documentation.]

🔺️ON THE TRIAL PACE

▫️ ADOR argued that the trial is being prolonged because Danielle's side refuses to acknowledge everything. ADOR said if Danielle's side identifies which parts they don't acknowledge, they'll refute only those points to expedite the trial.

▫️ ADOR also requested 2-3 months to submit an appraisal application. The judge gave them until July 10.

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles didn't mention the judge pushing back on ADOR's timeline request or the July 10 deadline.]

🟨 DANIELLE'S SIDE ARGUMENTS

🔺️ON CORRECTIVE MEASURES

▫️ Danielle's lawyers argued: "The plaintiff's side has never once given Danielle an opportunity to rectify the situation."

▫️ "They sent a registered mail and immediately terminated the contract right after. It seems like from the beginning, only Danielle was the one determined to terminate the contract."

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles mentioned Danielle's side argued she was "never given a chance," but the fan provides a more specific quote about the registered mail and immediate termination, suggesting the articles summarized this argument more vaguely.]

🔺️ON SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT AND ESTOPPEL

▫️ Danielle's side argued that AAO related matters and everything before the union establishment were done together by all members.

▫️ They claimed that EO, Elle and Omega were all known to ADOR from previous incidents.

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles mentioned Danielle's side argued ADOR already knew about these facts, but the fan adds the specific detail that members have never performed under the NewJeans name, always using NJZ, which ADOR acknowledged. This wasn't reported in articles.]

▫️ Danielle's side argued that saying only Danielle has a "significant reason for termination" is a violation of estoppel in the lawsuit and a breach of ADOR's own intent.

🔺️ON THE "PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH"

▫️ Danielle's lawyers argued that ADOR violated the principle of good faith (Article 2 of the Civil Act), exercising rights in a way that disregards the other party's trust and legitimate interests.

▫️ They pointed out: "You left on your own accord, and when you said it wasn't the court's decision, you came back. You said in the past that you'd forgive me if I came back. But now you're claiming I said I wanted to come back, this is the typical attitude of someone who's in the wrong."

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles mentioned the good faith argument briefly, but the fan provides a much more detailed quote that directly captures Danielle's side's frustration with ADOR's contradiction.]

👨‍⚖️ JUDGE'S COMMENTS & RULINGS

🔺️ON EVIDENCE DISPLAY

▫️ The judge told ADOR: "I'm confused whether the evidence you've submitted is for the court or for the journalists and the media. I'll only allow citations of evidence for the purpose of explaining to the bench."

🔸️[Comparison note: This was reported in news articles, but the fan provides the exact quote which gives more weight to the judge's skepticism.]

▫️ ADOR's PPT was filled with quoted words from Telegram conversations. Danielle's side requested that the Telegram screens not be displayed. The judge agreed, as this trial involves a celebrity, not a public figure.

▫️ The judge concluded that direct evidentiary content would be mentioned in an "abstracted" manner.

🔺️ON DANIELLE AND HER MOTHER

▫️ The judge told ADOR: "The plaintiff is grouping Danielle and Danielle's mother together in their claims, so I request that the two be separated at the next trial."

🔸️[Comparison note: This was reported in news articles, but the fan's quote is more direct and captures the judge's tone.]

🔺️ON OVERSEAS FACT-FINDING

▫️ The judge suggested both sides email overseas corporations directly to receive responses, rather than going through formal court channels.

▫️ ADOR continued to argue that overseas corporations are unlikely to respond to emails and even a Korean corporation's fact-check request might not be complied with. The judge continued to propose measures to quickly conclude Danielle's case.

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles mentioned the judge suggested emailing brands, but the fan reports ADOR's continued resistance and the judge's persistence in finding ways to speed up Danielle's case, adding context not in articles.]

🔺️ON THE APPRAISAL REQUEST

▫️ ADOR requested 2-3 months to submit an appraisal application. The judge gave both sides until July 10.

▫️ Danielle's side asked for an earlier deadline (July 8) for the plaintiff only. ADOR said that's not enough time. The judge said: "Both sides do it by 7/10."

▫️ The judge also noted: "I'll draw lots of the emotional witnesses on 7/13. If you don't guide me on the application, what can I do?"

🔸️[Comparison note: The news articles didn't report the specific July 10 deadline or the judge's comment about drawing lots on 7/13. The fan provides a much more detailed picture of the scheduling dispute.]

🔺️ON WITNESS EXAMINATION AND IDENTITY PROTECTION

▫️ ADOR expressed concern that if witnesses are named, they could face cyberbullying. The fan noted: "The plaintiff says the witness is worried about their name being exposed and facing cyberbullying."

▫️ The fan commented: "This sounds like something the plaintiff keeps hearing in all the other Hybe affiliate trials", implying this is a recurring argument used by HYBE's legal teams.

🔸️[Comparison note: This was NOT reported in news articles. The fan revealed ADOR raised concerns about witness identity and cyberbullying, which adds a new dimension to the case not covered by mainstream media.]

▫️ The judge asked ADOR: "Are the witnesses you requested friendly witnesses or hostile witnesses?" ADOR said they are friendly.

▫️ The judge responded: "Then isn't the questionnaire itself the answer? What matters now is objective facts, but there are too many subjective questions in it. Why not just do it as written testimony and only ask about the core disputed issues at the next hearing?"

🔸️[Comparison note: This exchange was NOT in news articles. The judge's suggestion to use written testimony instead of in-person examination suggests skepticism about ADOR's witness strategy.]

▫️ ADOR requested that witness examination be fixed for July 23, with the phrase that they must attend if they don't properly submit a written response.

🔺️ON THE NEXT HEARING

▫️If witness examination is submitted in writing at the next hearing, July 23, there will be no in-person witness examination.

▫️ The next hearing is scheduled for September 10.

📝 ATTENDEE'S OVERALL IMPRESSION

▫️ The fan noted that ADOR hasn't made much proper progress since the last hearing date.

▫️ The judge listened well to all of ADOR's claims and always asked for ADOR's opinion first when scheduling dates.

▫️ However, when Danielle's side requested a quick decision on her case, the judge accommodated it as much as possible.

▫️ The fan concluded: "The judge isn't taking sides with one party but is conducting a fair and common sense trial. If it seems favorable to our side, you can let go of your anxiety by thinking that it's not because someone is taking our side, but because it's truly a situation where we can't help but have the advantage."

🔍 INTERESTING NOTE FROM THE ATTENDEE

▫️ A person claiming to be part of the plaintiff's legal team skipped the line and loudly made "tsk! tch!" clicking sounds every time Danielle's side spoke, so loud it echoed through the courtroom. A court staff member eventually stood right in front of them with a terrifying expression, watching closely the whole time.

📌 Fan's follow-up on community rumors (July 3)

▫️ The fan who attended the hearing later addressed rumors circulating in the community about the "double contract" and "industrial information leak."

▫️ The fan stated that they inquired at both Hwawoo (Danielle's law firm) and Sejong (MHJ's law firm) about these rumors. Both firms confirmed that while the basic facts of the double contract are real, the exaggerated community narratives such as claims of a major criminal conspiracy or information theft are false and pieced together without proper context.

▫️ The fan said the rumors are being distorted into a "patchwork novel" and that it's "utterly ridiculous", telling fans not to worry or stress.

▫️ They also noted that these distortions are only being spread in online communities, not in news articles because publishing a false article could cause legal trouble for media outlets.

📎 Source: https://x.com/leeetokki

Yeon from Hearts2Hearts was asked during a fancall if she knew NewJeans' "Ditto" and she immediately started singing it. She is so cute. 😊

Source: https://x.com/i/status/2072076580533174724

A football digital creator recently spotted NewJeans Haerin and Hyein in the US and shared a video online. Looks like they were at a World Cup match or filming something. Always nice to see them out and about. 🐹🐱

Source:

https://x.com/i/status/2071101246623060136

https://x.com/i/status/2070895749391609897

Caught a nice moment from a recent IZNA fan call. Jeemin revealed that Minji reached out to her first since their birthdays are close. Minji's is May 7, Jeemin's is May 8. They exchanged birthday wishes and gifts.

Thought I'd share since we don't get many positive moments these days. 💙🐻

Source: https://x.com/i/status/2069771866529493365

We hit 400! 🐰 Drop your three words, or just say whatever's on your mind. 💙💗💛💚💜

Danielle's lawyer shared the official KFTC notification about the investigation into HYBE and ADOR. Some key details from the notice:

1. Case opened: April 30, 2026 (case number 2026 Seo-gyeong 1055)

2. What's being investigated: Abuse of dominant market position and unfair trade practices

3. Complainant's pseudonym: Sagong Seong-mi (since they didn't consent to identity disclosure)

Possible outcomes:

1. If violation found: warnings, corrective orders, fines, or prosecution

2. If no violation: case closed

3. If evidence insufficient or circumstances change (e.g., business closure): investigation suspended

One important note: The KFTC admits investigations can take a long time. They cite difficulties with evidence gathering, legal consultations, fact verification and on-site inspections.

Source: https://m.blog.naver.com/PostView.naver?blogId=peles1&logNo=224331209611&navType=by

Danielle's attorney, Jeong Jong-chae of Jeongbak Law Firm, posted a follow-up blog explaining the significance of the KFTC launching an investigation into HYBE and ADOR. Here's what he said and why it matters.

1. The KFTC doesn't just investigate anything

The attorney makes a key point: the KFTC launching an investigation is itself a meaningful step. They don't investigate every complaint that comes in. They review the report and supporting documents first and only move forward if they determine there may be grounds for an investigation. That's a preliminary judgment that the complaint has merit, not a guarantee they'll rule against HYBE, but it's not nothing either.

2. This is actually unprecedented

Here's the part that really stands out: since the KFTC introduced the Standard Exclusive Entertainment Agency Contracts in 2009 (after the TVXQ case), there has never been a single case where the KFTC initiated an investigation into an agency's contract termination or penalty claims against an artist, even when those contracts were based on the government's own standard terms. Courts have also almost never ruled in favor of entertainers on penalty claims under these standard contracts.

The attorney's argument was that those standard contracts, created over 15 years ago, are completely out of step with today's K-pop market, which has grown into a massive global industry. By pointing out that the standard contracts have effectively become a "standard that cannot function in reality," he managed to get the KFTC to actually look into it.

3. The gap between "investigation" and "ruling"

The attorney is careful not to overstate things. He notes that just because an investigation has been launched doesn't mean the investigator will ultimately find illegality or recommend action. But he also points out that most complaints don't even get this far, so the fact that this one did is significant.

Source: https://m.blog.naver.com/PostView.naver?blogId=peles1&logNo=224326376378&navType=by

▫️ADOR has filed a series of new requests in court. Based on the filings:

🔸️Request for Danielle's financial transaction records, tax records and payment history

🔸️Fact-finding inquiries submitted to Omega, Elle Singapore, ComplexCon and Emotional Oranges

🔸️Request for an appraisal (likely to calculate damages)

▫️Why is ADOR asking the court for this instead of just emailing the brands?

🔸️At the June 11 hearing, Judge Nam In-soo actually told both sides to just email these companies directly and submit whatever responses they got aa it would be faster than going through formal court channels. The judge specifically said this would save time.

🔸️So why is ADOR going through the court anyway? Probably because they're not getting the answers they want voluntarily. When you request financial records through the court, it becomes a court order and non-compliance has consequences. It's a more forceful way to get information, but it also makes the process longer. ADOR chose the slower, more invasive route despite the judge giving them a faster option.

▫️How serious is this?

🔸️For Danielle: It's invasive. ADOR wants to see her personal financial records, tax history and payment details. It's a way to build their damages case and find evidence they can use against her.

🔸️For ADOR: It signals they're committed to going after her financially. But it also shows they're not just relying on what they already have and they're still digging for more. That suggests their case might not be as airtight as they'd like.

🔸️For the timeline: Going through the court for overseas fact-finding is going to take months. That's exactly what Danielle's side has been warning about. ADOR's tactics are dragging this out.

Source: https://x.com/i/status/2070292603808157863

"Can't even see a happy post about the relevance of NJZ without trolls bringing them down by dragging another group into it. Disgusting fan behavior and so sick of seeing the constant obsession of using both groups for fan wars." Shoutout to u/Radiant-Average-4221 for originally posting this.

Reposting it here with usernames and profile pics blurred. Just a reminder to follow Rule 2: always blur identifiers when sharing hate comments. Keeps the sub safe and stops us from accidentally amplifying the trolls.

Update on this: The account that was posting hate comments and dragging illit to downplay newjeans? Turns out the person behind it is a p3d0phile living in Japan. They were exposed in a thread on X and their account got suspended. 👇

https://x.com/ShadowOfficals/status/1867230418174611941

Can’t even see a happy post about the relevance of NJZ without trolls bringing them down by dragging another group into it. Disgusting fan behavior and so sick of seeing the constant obsession of using both groups for fan wars

The Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) has launched an investigation into HYBE and ADOR following a complaint filed by Danielle's legal team (Jeongbak Law Firm). The complaint alleges abuse of market dominance and unfair trade practices.

1️⃣ The Legal Basis for the Complaint

▫️The complaint was filed with the KFTC rather than pursued solely through civil litigation. The stated reason is that HYBE and ADOR hold a monopsonistic position in the K-pop artist management market - meaning they dominate the demand side of artist contracts. According to the complaint, this market structure limits artists' ability to find alternative agencies when faced with unfair treatment, resulting in what is described as market foreclosure.

2️⃣ Allegation of Discriminatory Treatment

▫️The complaint notes that all five NewJeans members issued the same contract termination notices and engaged in similar independent activities. Despite this, ADOR terminated only Danielle's contract and filed a lawsuit seeking approximately ₩100B (~$72.5M) in penalties against her, while other members were allowed to return. This is cited as discriminatory treatment without reasonable justification.

3️⃣ Purpose of the Lawsuit

▫️The complaint argues that ADOR is aware Danielle lacks the financial means to pay ₩33B (~$24M) even if the lawsuit is successful. The filing questions why a profit-driven company would pursue litigation with no economic benefit, spending hundreds of millions in legal fees, unless there were a hidden objective.

▫️According to the complaint, that objective is to:

🔸️Permanently remove Danielle from the K-pop market

🔸️Use her case as a deterrent to other artists

🔸️Strengthen HYBE's control over its artists

4️⃣ Contractual Penalty Clause

▫️The complaint identifies the penalty clause in the standard exclusive contract as a structural issue. Penalties are calculated based on gross revenue × remaining contract period, rather than the agency's actual loss (profit). For a group like NewJeans, the complaint estimates that the agency's actual loss would be 1/4 to 1/10 of gross revenue.

▫️The clause is described as imposing "unlimited liability" on artists. Even though the contract is based on a standard form issued by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the complaint argues that this does not exempt it from scrutiny under the Fair Trade Act.

5️⃣ Legal Precedent

▫️The complaint references a 2004 Seoul High Court ruling (2002Nu13613), which held that an entertainment agency's exercise of contractual rights can violate the Fair Trade Act if the claims are excessive. Danielle's lawyers argue that the current penalty clause is more severe than the damages clause previously reviewed in that case.

6️⃣ Market Effects

▫️The K-pop industry is described in the complaint as a multi-sided platform market with network effects. The alleged conduct is said to:

🔸️Exclude competing agencies

🔸️Reduce diversity in K-pop content

🔸️Affect consumer welfare (including fans who want OT5)

🔸️Create a foreclosure effect against smaller agencies and new entrants

7️⃣ Danielle's Stated Position

▫️According to her lawyer, Danielle's stated goal is to stand on stage with Minji, Hanni, Haerin, and Hyein again and perform for Bunnies as before, even if that outcome is currently uncertain.

8️⃣ Q&A from the Complaint

Q: Why file with the KFTC instead of civil litigation?

A: The complaint states that this case goes beyond contract interpretation and involves conduct that affects market competition.

Q: Isn't the contract based on the Ministry's standard form?

A: The complaint argues that a government standard form does not automatically guarantee fairness, citing the penalty clause's reliance on gross revenue rather than actual profit.

Q: What is a monopsony?

A: The term refers to a market where the buyer (in this case, the agency) holds overwhelming power. The complaint states that HYBE's position in the artist contract market qualifies as monopsonistic.

Q: What if the KFTC rules in Danielle's favor?

A: The complaint suggests this could serve as a precedent for evaluating artists' rights under competition law rather than private contract law alone.

Q: What is the foreclosure effect?

A: The complaint defines this as the prevention of artists from transferring agencies and the discouragement of new entrants into the market.

Source: https://m.blog.naver.com/peles1/224322439390

AND2BLE (the group with former ZB1 members Zhang Hao, Ricky, Han Yujin, Kim Gyu-bin, and Yoo Seung-eon) performed a cover of NewJeans' "Ditto" during their debut showcase concert in Seoul on June 19, 2026.

Source: https://x.com/i/status/2067971028949549444