HYBE and Min Hee Jin, the former CEO of ADOR, are involved in a legal battle over whether their shareholder agreement was terminated. Amid the legal battle, Min’s side argued, “The responsibility to prove that the shareholder agreement was terminated lies with HYBE, as they are the ones claiming it was ended.”
Min Hee Jin’s legal team stated on the night of April 17th, “We have already submitted two written rebuttals addressing the unfair reasons HYBE is giving for the termination. However, HYBE has not responded to the concerns raised by Min Hee Jin’s side about the illegality of the termination notice.”
They added, “HYBE submitted three additional written documents on April 11th, 14th, and 15th, just before the trial on April 17th. We will respond to these documents with our rebuttal in due time.”
Min’s side emphasized, “What’s important to note is that it’s HYBE’s responsibility to prove the termination of the shareholder agreement. In other words, HYBE must show that the agreement was ended by their termination notice.”
They further argued, “HYBE has suggested that Min Hee Jin’s side must counter HYBE’s claims before providing specific evidence. This goes against the principles of how evidence should be presented in civil cases. HYBE should understand that the responsibility to prove their case lies with them, regardless of whether Min Hee Jin’s side presents rebuttal evidence.”
Earlier that day, the Seoul Central District Court held the second hearing for Hybe’s lawsuit to confirm the termination of the shareholder agreement against Min Hee Jin.
The key issue in this lawsuit is whether Min Hee Jin can exercise the put option for the ADOR shares she owned, which were valued at approximately 100 billion won ($70 million).
HYBE’s legal team argued that the shareholder agreement was already terminated by the notice of termination, which means Min Hee Jin could no longer exercise the put option. They further stated that when Min Hee Jin tried to exercise the put option, the agreement had already been terminated, making her attempt invalid. Therefore, they believe this confirmation lawsuit is valid.
On the other hand, Min Hee Jin’s side argued that since the agreement was not terminated at the time she exercised the put option, there is no real purpose in this confirmation lawsuit.
>> NewJeans’ Objection Dismissed by Court; ADOR Retains Control Over Activities
Source (1)
