Min Hee-jin Wins Put Option Lawsuit; Court Acknowledges Legitimacy of ILLIT Plagiarism Allegations Against NewJeans

Min Hee-jin Wins Put Option Lawsuit

On the 12th, the Seoul Central District Court's Civil Settlement Division 31 held a ruling date for the shareholder contract termination confirmation lawsuit filed by HYBE against former Ador CEO Min Hee-jin and the stock purchase price claim lawsuit filed by Min against HYBE. In this trial, Min achieved a victory worth approximately 25.5 billion won. The put option lawsuit was a key dispute concerning the shareholder agreement between Ador and HYBE, representing a meaningful result in which Min's arguments were recognized by the court. A put option refers to the right to resell stocks at a specific price, and this lawsuit centered on legal disputes regarding contract interpretation and stock valuation between the two companies. The court's judgment is being interpreted as substantially acknowledging Min's position.

Court Acknowledges Legitimacy of ILLIT's NewJeans Plagiarism Allegations

A notable point in this trial is that the plagiarism issue Min has consistently raised has been recognized as legitimate by the court. In particular, regarding allegations that Belif Lab's group ILLIT imitated NewJeans' concept, the court ruled that the arguments were well-founded.

Citing a report, the court stated: "One member withdrew before ILLIT's debut, making them a five-member group, and they do not emphasize the lead vocalist's high notes and have ambiguous position boundaries, similar to NewJeans." This indicates that specific similarities exist between ILLIT and NewJeans.

A petition submitted by NewJeans' parents was also treated as important evidence. The court stated: "NewJeans' parents raised the copy issue through a petition," and even if Min persuaded the parents, "the petition itself was written by the parents in handwriting or computer, so it is merely one opinion on the copy issue." This decision acknowledged the credibility and evidentiary value of the petition.

Need for Creative Ethics and Social Discussion

The court explicitly stated that Min's raising of the plagiarism issue is justified from a creative ethics perspective. While stating "raising a plagiarism issue is justified from a creative ethics standpoint," the court added: "It appears the defendant would also be able to express their own views on the plagiarism issue." This position acknowledges mutual freedom of expression while maintaining that raising plagiarism allegations themselves is justified.

Additionally, the court ruled: "Even if concept fixation does not receive legal protection, the copy controversy raised by Min's side appears to be an issue that should be resolved through social discourse." This reveals the court's view that ethical issues in the cultural industry require social discussion, separate from legal copyright infringement.

The conflicting positions of HYBE and Ador were also mentioned. The court stated: "From HYBE's perspective, a synergistic effect between NewJeans and ILLIT can be expected, but from NewJeans' perspective, market encroachment concerns may arise," concluding: "In such circumstances, Ador's raising of the plagiarism issue is justified." This judgment acknowledged the differing interests of the two agencies.

Social Discussion on ILLIT Plagiarism Controversy

Belif Lab's arguments and the court's evaluation were also examined. Regarding Belif Lab's response that opinions both agreeing and disagreeing with ILLIT being similar increased after the group's debut, the court interpreted this as: "acknowledging that opinions that it was similar and opinions that it was not similar were evenly split." Simultaneously, the court pointed out: "No concrete evidence was presented that opinions disagreeing with similarity increased after debut," suggesting that Belif Lab's claims were made without clear basis.

The court also ruled: "It can be presumed that Belif Lab's representative had some awareness of the similarity issue when ILLIT's debut teaser was released." This implies the company may have been aware of plagiarism allegations but failed to respond. However, the court added: "There appears to be no material evidence that Belif Lab or HYBE consulted with or sought approval from Ador's side in advance."

Future Direction of Belif Lab's Damages Suit

The ongoing damages claim lawsuit between Belif Lab and former CEO Min is also drawing attention. Belif Lab has sought 2 billion won in damages, citing defamation and business interference based on allegations Min raised regarding ILLIT's imitation of NewJeans while claiming unlawful audits. The next hearing for this lawsuit is scheduled for March 27th.

The put option lawsuit and the damages claim lawsuit are separate legal disputes, but both stemmed from the conflict between Ador and HYBE. With Min's victory in the put option lawsuit, the progress of the upcoming damages claim lawsuit is worth monitoring.

HYBE released an official statement regarding this ruling. "We are disappointed that our arguments were not sufficiently accepted," the company stated, adding: "We will proceed with future legal procedures including an appeal after reviewing the judgment." This indicates that HYBE is considering filing an appeal to a higher court rather than accepting this ruling.

This content is general information compiled based on publicly available materials. Please verify the exact details through official announcements from relevant institutions.