Ador and former NewJeans member Danielle Marsh are in a heated clash over whether the ongoing lawsuit is being intentionally delayed.
On the afternoon of May 14, the Seoul Central District Court held the first hearing for the damages lawsuit filed by Ador against Danielle and former CEO Min Hee-jin (currently CEO of OK Records).
Back in December last year, Ador notified Danielle of her contract termination, believing she and her family caused the current dispute. Ador filed a massive damages lawsuit totaling 43.1 billion KRW against Danielle and Min Hee-jin for reasons including breach of contract. During a preparatory hearing in March, Danielle’s side claimed Ador was intentionally delaying the trial by expanding the scope of defendants and requesting extensions, while Ador maintained that the issues are simply complex and require more review time.
During the hearing, Danielle’s legal team strongly protested, stating that Ador fired all previous legal representatives and failed to submit any materials by the evidence submission deadline, effectively trying to restart the trial with new lawyers. They argued, “The plaintiff took the incomprehensible step of dismissing all previous legal representatives who knew the case best,” and “Despite agreeing to a submission deadline of April 30, they submitted nothing and are now asking to start over just before the hearing.”
They continued, calling it “blatant and malicious trial delay,” and emphasized that since the deadline passed, Ador should be seen as having waived their right to prove the claims, and any subsequent evidence should be dismissed. They further requested strong sanctions from the court, claiming that replacing lawyers while refusing to submit an evidence plan is an attempt to “devastate the defendants’ lives.”
On the other hand, Ador completely denied any intention to delay. They asked the court to distinguish between a “standard speedy trial” and an “unusually fast” one, stating, “The plaintiff also wants a swift confirmation of rights and agrees with the court’s prompt progress.” However, they explained, “That process should not limit the plaintiff’s opportunity to provide evidence,” adding that some parts of the previous lawyers’ summaries needed correction and they intended to organize and submit remaining evidence together. They claimed the delay was due to realistic circumstances, not an intent to stall.
Specifically, Ador stated, “We have never hindered Danielle Marsh’s entertainment activities,” and argued that claiming contract termination while simultaneously claiming her activities are being blocked is contradictory. They added, “Danielle is free to promote as much as she wants even while the lawsuit is ongoing,” and countered that the lawsuit itself isn’t a practical restriction on her career.
Ador also emphasized that this case differs from previous lawsuits regarding shareholder agreements and exclusive contracts. They explained, “While previous trials focused on whether there were grounds for termination before April 22 last year, this case centers on the breach of duty of loyalty and third-party infringement that occurred after former CEO Min Hee-jin resigned.” They added that “new claims and evidence not covered in previous lawsuits will be submitted,” suggesting the defendants’ claims that everything has already been addressed stem from a misunderstanding of the legal structure.
The court also addressed the debate over the concept of “tampering.” The defendants argued that “tampering” is not a legal term and lacks clear precedents or standards, requesting Ador to define it. The court noted, “In the legal field, it is usually explained as third-party infringement of claims or unfair scouting, but in the industry, non-legal meanings are often mixed in,” and ordered both sides to submit organized precedents and similar cases from home and abroad.
The court ordered both parties to submit relevant evidence by June 2 and scheduled the next hearing for June 11. They also requested the prompt securing of related case records and witness applications.
Meanwhile, the five members of NewJeans declared the termination of their exclusive contracts in November last year, stating that trust in Ador had been broken. Ador subsequently filed a lawsuit to confirm the validity of the contracts, and the court ruled in favor of Ador in the first instance. Currently, Haerin, Hyein, and Hanni have returned to Ador, and Minji is reportedly in positive discussions regarding her return.
