The Seoul Central District Court’s Civil Division 62 (Presiding Judge Lee Hyun-seok) held the third hearing on the 11th for the damages lawsuit filed by ADOR against director Shin and the production team “Dolphiners.”
Former CEO Min appeared in court that day as a witness for director Shin and the Dolphiners. This was Min’s first court appearance since September 11, when she attended the hearing for the lawsuit concerning the confirmation of her contract termination with HYBE and the stock purchase payment related to the exercise of her put option.
Taking the stand, Min testified that there had been prior verbal consent to separately post the director’s cut of NewJeans’ “ETA” music video.
When asked whether Apple TBWA (Apple’s official advertising agency) needed to give consent for posting the director’s cut, she said, “The copyright itself belongs to ADOR, and Apple is just a partner,” adding, “I have the authority to approve matters related to creative rights.”
In response to a question about ADOR’s claim that a penalty should still be paid even though the video was taken down the day after ADOR’s complaint, Min said, “I think that’s unreasonable. Writing a one-sided contract and then filing a damages claim on the grounds that a certain part was violated amounts to an abuse of the law.”
She added, “All working-level staff make verbal agreements, so I find it strange that HYBE is applying such a strict standard only to director Shin.”
source: https://www.news1.kr/society/court-prosecution/5972433
original post: here
1. The more I read about her, the more I realize she's not cut to be CEO
2. The more I learn, the more I realize ADOR were right
3. But isn't Min Heejin the one who wrote the contract? What is she trying to say?
4. Aigo, what does she think a contract is?
5. ADOR was getting hate a year ago, but looking back, they did the right thing...
6. ??? Just what's the purpose of a contract then?
7. Does she really think there will be a day she can win? Nobody even believes anything she says now...
8. Min-ssi, I don't understand anything you're saying
10. Does she not know what the law is for?
0 Comments