News Hybe/MHJ Civil War Megathread (41 Viewers)

[Selfmate]

Min Hee-jin cleared of breach of trust allegation filed by Hybe

Police drop charge after yearlong investigation, Hybe says will appeal to prosecution

Former Ador CEO Min Hee-jin, who was accused of breach of trust by Ador's parent company Hybe, has been cleared of the charges, police confirmed.

On Tuesday, Min’s legal team stated that after an investigation of more than a year, police found no evidence of illegal conduct on Min's part. As a result, the criminal complaint filed by Hybe was dismissed without sending the case to the prosecution.

Hybe filed a complaint on April 26, 2024, accusing Min and Ador executives of attempting to seize control of the company. The complaint was based on KakaoTalk messages purportedly suggesting a plan to take over management rights.

Min’s side countered that such a takeover was structurally impossible, as Hybe holds an 80 percent stake in Ador. They also argued that there was no attempt to harm the company’s value or commit any act constituting a breach of trust.

In August last year, Ador’s board appointed in-house director Kim Joo-young as the new CEO. Min stepped down from the CEO post and officially resigned as an internal director on Nov. 20.

Hybe said it would file an appeal with the prosecution against the police decision.

“After the police investigation, new developments occurred, including NewJeans members declaring their intent to terminate their contracts. In related court proceedings, multiple new pieces of evidence were submitted, and based on these, the court regarded Min’s actions as very serious,” Hybe stated.

The company also emphasized that police had previously dismissed complaints filed by Min in which she accused five Hybe executives of obstruction of business and defamation.

Although Min has been cleared of the breach of trust charge, she still faces civil litigation by Hybe subsidiaries Source Music and Belift Lab.

Seoul Western District Court is scheduled to hold a third hearing on Friday for both lawsuits filed by the labels seeking compensation for damages.

Source Music, home to girl group Le Sserafim, filed a 500 million won ($362,000) suit on the claim that Min defamed the company by stating at a press conference in April 2024 that “Hybe prevented NewJeans from being promoted until after Le Sserafim’s debut,” implying the girl group had benefited from favoritism.

Belift Lab, which manages girl group Illit, also filed a lawsuit for 2 billion won alleging that Min’s public statement accusing Illit of “copying NewJeans” caused them severe reputational damage.

Concurrently, Min is entangled in a separate legal battle with Hybe over a put option dispute worth approximately 26 billion won.

In November, Min notified Hybe of her intent to exercise her put option, which would entitle her to receive 26 billion won. However, Hybe claims that Min’s rights to the put option were no longer valid, as the shareholder agreement was terminated in July 2024.

The court is expected to review the legal validity of the put option alongside Hybe’s separate lawsuit seeking confirmation of the shareholder agreement's termination.

Source: https://www.koreaherald.com/article/10531994

 

[Selfmate]

Min Hee-jin and HYBE dispute escalates as prosecution objections filed

The fierce battle of 'Min Hee-jin vs. HYBE,' which heated up 2024, is expected to continue this year. Although the police determined there was 'no charge' regarding former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin's alleged breach of duty, HYBE immediately announced they would file an objection with the prosecution.

On the 15th, the former CEO's side stated, 'In April last year, HYBE reported former CEO Min Hee-jin for breach of duty. As a result of over a year of police investigation, it was found that there was no illegality on the part of former CEO Min, and we inform you that today the police decided not to prosecute both cases filed by HYBE against her due to 'no charge.'

Earlier, HYBE conducted an urgent audit after concluding that former CEO Min Hee-jin attempted to seize control of ADOR and the affiliated girl group NewJeans in April of last year. They subsequently reported her to the police for alleged breach of duty.

In response, former CEO Min Hee-jin held a press conference denying the allegations of attempting to usurp control and NewJeans. Although she admitted to harboring resentment against the management of HYBE, the major shareholder, and to having discussions with the deputy heads of ADOR about it, she claimed she had never executed such actions.

However, in August of the same year, the ADOR board, comprising personnel from HYBE, dismissed Min Hee-jin from her CEO position, and she voluntarily stepped down from her role as an inside director of ADOR in November, leaving HYBE. She is currently engaged in legal disputes with HYBE and its affiliated labels.

In the meantime, upon the police's conclusion that there was no charge regarding former CEO Min Hee-jin's alleged breach of duty, HYBE immediately protested.

HYBE stated, 'In response to the decision not to prosecute the breach of duty case raised against former CEO Min Hee-jin and others last year, we will promptly file an objection with the prosecution today.' HYBE's side noted, 'Since new situations, such as the declaration of contract termination by NewJeans members, have arisen following the police investigation, and numerous new evidences have been submitted in related trials, the court has judged former CEO Min's actions very severely.'

In this regard, HYBE stated, 'Since the panel of the appellate court (Seoul High Court) found that former CEO Min is in a position of 'intentionally destroying the integrated structure that constitutes the basis of the exclusive contract,' we would like to contest the decision not to prosecute in the objection procedure.'

Moreover, HYBE stated, 'Additionally, regarding the case where former CEO Min Hee-jin and others filed complaints against five HYBE executives in July last year for obstruction of business and violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation), the authorities concluded there was no charge. They found that the claims made by HYBE were 'hard to see as falsehoods,' 'since they relate to public interest, the purpose of defamation is not recognized,' and that 'the KakaoTalk conversations were obtained through lawful authority during the audit process.'

Finally, HYBE stated, 'We inform you that the cases filed indiscriminately by former CEO Min and her associates against HYBE and the executives of our affiliated companies have all been concluded with no charges', and added, 'The cases where former CEO Min Hee-jin reported the management of Belift Lab and creative directors for defamation and false charges; where Timberwolves reported the management of Belift Lab for violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation); and where Shin Woo-seok, the representative of the Dolphin Kidnapping Group, filed a complaint against the current ADOR management for violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation) have all been concluded with no charges or dismissed.'

Meanwhile, as HYBE has filed an objection, the conflict between Min Hee-jin and HYBE is expected to continue.

Source: https://biz.chosun.com/en/en-entertainment/2025/07/15/MY5IICP7OVF5PINHX5SWKRWXTE/

 

[RandAlThor]

Hybe wants their pound of flesh.

 

[Selfmate]

Hybe wants their pound of flesh.

they have ever right to appeal but this does count as a loss but it's just more bas news for them given the recent financial scandal issues with the IPO

 

[RandAlThor]

they have ever right to appeal but this does count as a loss but it's just more bas news for them given the recent financial scandal issues with the IPO

True that.

the problem was always that it(the attempted undercutting) was unethical not necessarily over the line illegal.

And i would say the discussed plans seemed to play out down the road almost as recorded in the chats ect.
if they can get evidence of the parents foreknowledge its over.

 

[Selfmate]

True that.

the problem was always that it(the attempted undercutting) was unethical not necessarily over the line illegal.

And i would say the discussed plans seemed to play out down the road almost as recorded in the chats ect.
if they can get evidence of the parents foreknowledge its over.

which is why everyone should leave it up to the courts to decide since we have no knowledge of what's in the contracts and whether such Non Compete Clauses exist or whether it rises up to the levels of criminality

 

[Abeamus]

True that.

the problem was always that it(the attempted undercutting) was unethical not necessarily over the line illegal.

And i would say the discussed plans seemed to play out down the road almost as recorded in the chats ect.
if they can get evidence of the parents foreknowledge its over.

It is illegal but with criminal cases you cannot be charged on plans so it was the same issue as the 1st injunction she won because she hadn't actually done anything yet.

With the Civil Cases there's a lower burden of proof so plans can be enough to get her in trouble if the narrative is strong enough where it was never going to work in a Criminal Case due to the higher burden of proof.

Hybe did pick up a bigger win in the chats that Min Heejin was fighting to get thrown out as illegally obtained got cleared as legally obtained so Hybe can use them as evidence in every case.

 

[Selfmate]

Hybe did pick up a bigger win in the chats that Min Heejin was fighting to get thrown out as illegally obtained got cleared as legally obtained so Hybe can use them as evidence in every case.

not doubting you my friend but do you have a source for that and for any other specifics of the case itself

 

[Abeamus]

not doubting you my friend but do you have a source for that and for any other specifics of the case itself

“Additionally, we would like to inform you that the complaint filed by Min Hee-jin in July last year against five HYBE executives—alleging obstruction of business and defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act—was also dismissed by investigators. Authorities concluded that HYBE’s claims “cannot be considered false,” “relate to the public interest and thus do not constitute defamation,” and that the KakaoTalk messages in question “were obtained lawfully during the course of an audit with proper authority.”

HYBE Pushes Back After Police Drop Charges Against Min Hee Jin

HYBE challenges police decision to clear former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin reigniting legal battle over ADOR and NJZ (formerly NewJeans).

www.koreaboo.com

 

[RandAlThor]

“Additionally, we would like to inform you that the complaint filed by Min Hee-jin in July last year against five HYBE executives—alleging obstruction of business and defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act—was also dismissed by investigators. Authorities concluded that HYBE’s claims “cannot be considered false,” “relate to the public interest and thus do not constitute defamation,” and that the KakaoTalk messages in question “were obtained lawfully during the course of an audit with proper authority.”

HYBE Pushes Back After Police Drop Charges Against Min Hee Jin

HYBE challenges police decision to clear former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin reigniting legal battle over ADOR and NJZ (formerly NewJeans).

www.koreaboo.com

yep i really do not see a way for she and them to approach winning.

 

[Selfmate]

“Additionally, we would like to inform you that the complaint filed by Min Hee-jin in July last year against five HYBE executives—alleging obstruction of business and defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act—was also dismissed by investigators. Authorities concluded that HYBE’s claims “cannot be considered false,” “relate to the public interest and thus do not constitute defamation,” and that the KakaoTalk messages in question “were obtained lawfully during the course of an audit with proper authority.”

HYBE Pushes Back After Police Drop Charges Against Min Hee Jin

HYBE challenges police decision to clear former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin reigniting legal battle over ADOR and NJZ (formerly NewJeans).

www.koreaboo.com

cheers mate appreciate it

 

[Abeamus]

yep i really do not see a way for she and them to approach winning.

Me neither as they've all shown they say too much already in public with the press conferences so god knows how much they've said over text

 

[Abeamus]

I don't have an English translated article but this article mentions that MHJs clown car of lawyers presented online comments saying Illits Hanbok shoot was similar to NewJeans one as proof of plagiarism

 

[Selfmate]

Min Hee Jin’s side, “Statements on NewJeans–ILLIT plagiarism were a defensive response to HYBE’s illegal audit”

Former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin, who led the creation of the girl group NewJeans, has once again emphasized the alleged similarities between NewJeans and HYBE's newer girl group, ILLIT, in an ongoing legal battle with HYBE Labels.

On July 18, the 12th Civil Division of the Seoul Western District Court held the third hearing in a damages lawsuit filed by HYBE Labels against Min, seeking 2.5 billion KRW (approx. $1.8 million) in compensation.

During the session, Min’s legal team presented a collection of online comments from platforms such as Theqoo and Instiz, in which users accused ILLIT of imitating NewJeans. Min’s side argued that the plagiarism controversy was not initiated by them but rather raised by the public, media, and industry insiders shortly after ILLIT’s debut.

Min’s representatives explained, “The issue of ILLIT copying NewJeans was first raised internally within HYBE. However, in response, HYBE conducted an illegal audit. The press conference and public statements that followed were made in a defensive effort to reveal the true motive behind HYBE's audit.”

They continued, “This is a case involving defamation and business obstruction, not copyright infringement. Despite this, ILLIT’s side continues to frame the issue as one of copyright by focusing on the use of terms like ‘copying’ and ‘plagiarism.’ Plagiarism does not equate to copyright infringement. The plaintiff is blurring the issue by implying that the term ‘plagiarism’ means a legal violation of copyright, which has already been clarified in prior case law.”

Addressing why ILLIT's camp is fixated on choreography, Min’s team said, “Other aspects bear even clearer resemblances, making it difficult for them to deny imitation. The similarities between NewJeans and ILLIT are too extensive to be dismissed as coincidental.”

Min’s lawyers also emphasized that the public's perception of ILLIT as a NewJeans imitation predates Min’s own remarks. “When ILLIT was first unveiled, many immediately assumed they were looking at NewJeans. The similarities were so striking that even critics and international fans described ILLIT as a ‘Min Hee Jin-style girl group’ or commented that ‘everything about them reminds me of NewJeans.’”

This controversy follows Min’s explosive press conference in April last year, during which she publicly criticized HYBE chairman Bang Si Hyuk and other executives. She claimed HYBE debuted LE SSERAFIM ahead of NewJeans despite ADOR’s earlier preparations, and that HYBE suppressed NewJeans’ promotional activities until LE SSERAFIM debuted. She also alleged that ILLIT had copied NewJeans’ concepts.

In response, SOURCE MUSIC, the agency behind LE SSERAFIM, filed a defamation lawsuit against Min seeking 500 million KRW (about $359,300) in damages. BELIFT LAB, the agency representing ILLIT, also filed a separate 2 billion KRW (approximately $1.44 million) lawsuit citing reputational damage caused by Min's statements.

Source: https://www.allkpop.com/article/202...e-a-defensive-response-to-hybes-illegal-audit

ILLIT’s agency refutes plagiarism claims, "If ILLIT is a copy of NewJeans, then NewJeans is just a copy of GFriend"

On July 18, during the third hearing of the 2.5 billion KRW (approximately $1.9 million) damages lawsuit filed by BELIFT LAB against former ADOR CEO Min Hee Jin, ILLIT's agency strongly rejected claims that their girl group had copied NewJeans. They argued that Min's accusations were contradictory and lacked consistency.

The hearing, held at the Seoul Western District Court's 12th Civil Division, featured ILLIT’s legal representatives presenting materials that highlighted similarities between NewJeans and the earlier girl group GFriend (Girlfriend). They pointed to techniques and concepts such as the transition from 16:9 high-definition to 4:3 low-quality video formats, wide-angle shots of girls running and crossing bridges, and music videos themed around school uniforms. According to the agency, all of these were used by GFriend five to six years before NewJeans debuted.

The agency also submitted examples of advertisements and photoshoots that mirrored GFriend's previous content. These included group photos in white outfits with dreamlike atmospheres, hanbok-themed concept photos that Min Hee Jin had previously described as unique to NewJeans, and visual compositions shot in front of red structures with the sea and sky in the background. ILLIT’s representatives emphasized that these stylistic choices were not exclusive to NewJeans and had been seen earlier in GFriend’s promotional material.

"Just as NewJeans is not considered a copy of GFriend, ILLIT should not be called a copy of NewJeans simply because of a few overlapping elements," said ILLIT’s agency. "Someone with as much experience in the entertainment industry as Min Hee Jin should understand that these similarities are often coincidental and not evidence of deliberate copying."

In April 2023, Min Hee Jin held a press conference where she disclosed internal conflicts with HYBE executives including Chairman Bang Si Hyuk. She claimed that HYBE delayed the promotion of NewJeans and prioritized the debut of LE SSERAFIM. She also accused ILLIT of imitating NewJeans’ concept.

In response, SOURCE MUSIC, the agency behind LE SSERAFIM, filed a defamation lawsuit against Min seeking 500 million KRW (about $359,300) in damages. BELIFT LAB, the agency representing ILLIT, also filed a separate 2 billion KRW (approximately $1.44 million) lawsuit citing reputational damage caused by Min's statements.

During the hearing, ILLIT’s side addressed Min’s specific claims that promotional methods such as the use of a COEX outdoor screen, selfies in front of the Eiffel Tower, and group poses were imitations of NewJeans.

They argued that if such reasoning were applied consistently, even NewJeans’ content could be seen as derivative. "We are not saying NewJeans copied anyone else," said the agency. "We are simply pointing out that by Min Hee Jin’s own logic, NewJeans could also be viewed as copying earlier idols."

The ongoing legal dispute continues to spark widespread discussion in the K-pop industry regarding originality, inspiration, and ownership of creative expression.

Source: https://www.allkpop.com/article/202...jeans-then-newjeans-is-just-a-copy-of-gfriend

 

[Selfmate]

Min Hee-jin Accuses ILLIT of Copying NewJeans’ Hanbok Concept: “Too Similar in Every Way”

Min Hee-jin accuses ILLIT of copying NewJeans’ hanbok photoshoot, citing striking visual and stylistic similarities that have also confused the public.

Min Hee-jin, former CEO of ADOR and the creative mind behind the girl group NewJeans, has once again sparked debate—this time by accusing fellow HYBE group ILLIT of copying NewJeans’ hanbok-themed photoshoot and debut style.

During the third hearing of a 2.5 billion KRW civil lawsuit filed by HYBE Labels against Min on July 18 at the Seoul Western District Court, Min’s legal team raised one of the most controversial issues: the striking similarity between hanbok photos of NewJeans and ILLIT.

“At a glance, it’s hard to tell whether they are different groups or the same group,” Min’s side stated. “From color schemes, props, styling, backgrounds, compositions, placement of members, gaze direction, to lighting—everything is alarmingly similar.”

Min’s side also compared the official debut appearances of both groups, claiming that ILLIT mimicked NewJeans’ first public appearance. “NewJeans members officially made their faces known at a Chanel event, and ILLIT mirrored that by making their first appearance at a fashion show. Their hair, makeup, and overall styling were so similar that netizens commented things like, ‘Isn’t this NewJeans?’ or ‘I thought it was a NewJeans post by mistake.’”

The visual identity of ILLIT is also under fire. Min’s representatives claim that ILLIT’s photoshoots and album design closely imitate NewJeans’ retro-inspired concept.

“ILLIT’s logo, pixelated fonts, and single-tone illustrations on white backgrounds reflect the same aesthetics NewJeans is known for.”

Even choreography was highlighted. “ILLIT’s ‘My World’ features the same moves found in NewJeans’ ‘Attention,’ and their ‘Magnetic’ includes the key choreography from NewJeans’ ‘Ditto,’” Min’s team argued.

Min Hee-jin had previously made similar accusations during an explosive press conference in April 2024, where she also revealed internal conflicts with HYBE executives. She claimed that although NewJeans was ADOR’s first girl group, HYBE prioritized LE SSERAFIM’s debut and restricted her team from promoting NewJeans ahead of that.

In response, SOURCE MUSIC (LE SSERAFIM’s agency) filed a 500 million KRW lawsuit for defamation. BELIFT LAB, ILLIT’s agency, followed with a 2 billion KRW damages claim, stating that Min’s accusations harmed the group’s reputation.

As legal battles continue and the court weighs the allegations, the K-pop community is divided—raising larger questions about originality, influence, and creative ownership in the ever-competitive industry.

Source: https://kbizoom.com/min-heejin-criticizes-illit-for-copying-newjeans-hanbok-concept/

ILLIT Refutes Min Hee-jin’s Copycat Claims, Citing BTS, Jennie, aespa as Counterexamples

ILLIT rebuts Min Hee-jin’s plagiarism claims by comparing concepts, debuts, and choreography with other K-pop acts including BTS and BLACKPINK’s Jennie.

In a heated legal battle, ILLIT’s agency firmly refuted allegations by Min Hee-jin, former ADOR CEO and creative director behind NewJeans, that ILLIT plagiarized NewJeans’ concept and style. The dispute is part of a broader ₩2.5 billion damages lawsuit brought by HYBE Labels against Min, with the third hearing held at the Seoul Western District Court on July 18.

During the session, ILLIT’s legal team systematically dismantled the plagiarism allegations, comparing debut strategies, aesthetics, music production methods, and choreography styles between the two groups. Min Hee-jin had previously alleged that ILLIT copied NewJeans’ music, visuals, and cultural aesthetics — including a hanbok photoshoot concept.

A Tale of Two Concepts
ILLIT emphasized a clear conceptual divergence from NewJeans. While NewJeans channels a Y2K retro mood with no defined narrative universe, ILLIT embraces fantasy-driven “princess and magical girl” themes with an expansive world-building approach. Musically, ILLIT engages multiple producers and leans into pop-oriented sounds, whereas NewJeans relies on a cohesive production team.

Regarding debut formats, ILLIT debuted through JTBC’s audition program “R U Next?”, offering extensive pre-debut exposure. Conversely, NewJeans adopted a mystique-based rollout, withholding member identities until the surprise release of their debut music video.

Debunking the Hanbok Photo Controversy
Min’s assertion that ILLIT copied NewJeans’ hanbok photoshoot was also challenged. ILLIT’s team pointed to numerous K-pop idols who have historically worn hanbok in palatial settings, questioning Min’s claim of originality. “This claim is baseless and ignores the genre’s visual traditions,” their statement noted.

Choreography Not Exclusive to NewJeans
ILLIT’s defense further addressed accusations regarding choreography. They argued that the moves in question — such as “hair whips,” “arm rolls,” and sitting poses — were widely used across K-pop, citing performances by BTS, aespa, IVE, ITZY, G-Dragon, Jennie, and others. “These motions are public domain and should not be monopolized,” the group asserted.

They warned that allowing exclusive claims over such universal moves would set a damaging precedent for creativity and fair competition in K-pop choreography.

Broader Legal Implications
This case is intricately connected to Min Hee-jin’s broader conflict with HYBE. She previously accused HYBE of suppressing NewJeans’ promotion in favor of LE SSERAFIM and denounced ILLIT for copying NewJeans. In response, Source Music (LE SSERAFIM’s label) sued Min for ₩500 million, while Belift Lab (ILLIT’s label) sought ₩2 billion in damages for reputational harm.

As the legal battle continues, the K-pop industry watches closely. The outcome could influence creative boundaries, agency dynamics, and IP protections in idol branding and music production for years to come.

Source: https://kbizoom.com/illit-min-hee-jin-copycat-claims-rebuttal/

 

[Selfmate]

I don't have an English translated article but this article mentions that MHJs clown car of lawyers presented online comments saying Illits Hanbok shoot was similar to NewJeans one as proof of plagiarism

I found a couple of articles above in english my friend

 

[RandAlThor]

Seriously hanbok.. Those shoots all look alike its either long or short traditional or newer to start with. kinda like school uninis.

 

[Selfmate]

NewJeans’ 3rd anniversary reignites industry debate: creativity vs. control in K-pop

As girl group NewJeans marks its 3rd debut anniversary on July 22, discussions surrounding the conflict between HYBE and former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin have evolved beyond a corporate dispute into a reflection of structural tensions within the K-pop industry — touching on power, creativity, gender, and innovation.

In her academic paper titled “Creativity, Power, and Gender in the K-pop Industry: A Structural Analysis Through the Case of Min Hee-jin”, researcher Ko Yoon-hwa from the Academy of Korean Studies and Seoul National University’s Hallyu Research Center argues that the HYBE-ADOR conflict symbolizes a deeper structural contradiction in K-pop — a clash between centralized corporate power and the autonomy of creative visionaries.

While the feud has often been portrayed as Bang Si-hyuk (HYBE) vs. Min Hee-jin (ADOR), Ko suggests the underlying issue is: Who holds the authority to define creative content?

HYBE, having grown into a multi-label conglomerate with BigHit, Source Music, Pledis, and ADOR, has become a symbol of platform-based capital power in the K-pop space. In contrast, Min Hee-jin pursued an independent creative philosophy through ADOR and the launch of NewJeans, diverging from mainstream K-pop formulas with experimental branding and storytelling.

Ko analyzes the situation using Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory and the “exploitation vs. exploration” framework from business strategy. HYBE, once an explorer, has since leaned toward exploitation — prioritizing proven systems and stable revenue models. ADOR, however, aimed to remain exploratory by challenging norms and fostering originality, as seen with NewJeans’ aesthetic and strategy.

She concludes that successful organizations must strike a balance between exploitation (efficiency, stability) and exploration (innovation, risk-taking), and that Min’s path represents not just creative ambition but a larger vision for a creator-led production system in K-pop.

Ko also suggests that Min’s conflict with HYBE raised fundamental industry questions: Who defines K-pop content? Who owns creativity and innovation? This makes their clash more than just a business feud — it is a case study on the future of sustainability in K-pop.

On NewJeans’ legacy, the group debuted with the MV for Attention on July 22, 2022, and reshaped the industry with hits like Hype Boy, Ditto, and Super Shy, popularizing a genre often referred to as “easy listening K-pop.” With their second EP Get Up, they topped the Billboard 200 and landed five songs on the Hot 100, cementing their place as one of K-pop’s leading girl groups.

However, amidst the dispute between Min and HYBE over ADOR’s management and artist control, NewJeans is currently on hiatus. On their 3rd anniversary, ADOR posted a celebratory animation on social media, quietly acknowledging the group’s milestone.

Source: https://www.allkpop.com/article/202...ndustry-debate-creativity-vs-control-in-k-pop

 

[RandAlThor]

NewJeans’ 3rd anniversary reignites industry debate: creativity vs. control in K-pop

As girl group NewJeans marks its 3rd debut anniversary on July 22, discussions surrounding the conflict between HYBE and former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin have evolved beyond a corporate dispute into a reflection of structural tensions within the K-pop industry — touching on power, creativity, gender, and innovation.

In her academic paper titled “Creativity, Power, and Gender in the K-pop Industry: A Structural Analysis Through the Case of Min Hee-jin”, researcher Ko Yoon-hwa from the Academy of Korean Studies and Seoul National University’s Hallyu Research Center argues that the HYBE-ADOR conflict symbolizes a deeper structural contradiction in K-pop — a clash between centralized corporate power and the autonomy of creative visionaries.

While the feud has often been portrayed as Bang Si-hyuk (HYBE) vs. Min Hee-jin (ADOR), Ko suggests the underlying issue is: Who holds the authority to define creative content?

HYBE, having grown into a multi-label conglomerate with BigHit, Source Music, Pledis, and ADOR, has become a symbol of platform-based capital power in the K-pop space. In contrast, Min Hee-jin pursued an independent creative philosophy through ADOR and the launch of NewJeans, diverging from mainstream K-pop formulas with experimental branding and storytelling.

Ko analyzes the situation using Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory and the “exploitation vs. exploration” framework from business strategy. HYBE, once an explorer, has since leaned toward exploitation — prioritizing proven systems and stable revenue models. ADOR, however, aimed to remain exploratory by challenging norms and fostering originality, as seen with NewJeans’ aesthetic and strategy.

She concludes that successful organizations must strike a balance between exploitation (efficiency, stability) and exploration (innovation, risk-taking), and that Min’s path represents not just creative ambition but a larger vision for a creator-led production system in K-pop.

Ko also suggests that Min’s conflict with HYBE raised fundamental industry questions: Who defines K-pop content? Who owns creativity and innovation? This makes their clash more than just a business feud — it is a case study on the future of sustainability in K-pop.

On NewJeans’ legacy, the group debuted with the MV for Attention on July 22, 2022, and reshaped the industry with hits like Hype Boy, Ditto, and Super Shy, popularizing a genre often referred to as “easy listening K-pop.” With their second EP Get Up, they topped the Billboard 200 and landed five songs on the Hot 100, cementing their place as one of K-pop’s leading girl groups.

However, amidst the dispute between Min and HYBE over ADOR’s management and artist control, NewJeans is currently on hiatus. On their 3rd anniversary, ADOR posted a celebratory animation on social media, quietly acknowledging the group’s milestone.

Source: https://www.allkpop.com/article/202...ndustry-debate-creativity-vs-control-in-k-pop

sure ofc course she defines it that way....
NJ is just a rookie gg that blew up, nothing special. Their whole brand is youth and they are pissing it away.
lol the exploiter is actually MHJ not BHS

 

[Abeamus]

sure ofc course she defines it that way....
NJ is just a rookie gg that blew up, nothing special. Their whole brand is youth and they are pissing it away.
lol the exploiter is actually MHJ not BHS

Funny to me how NewJeans supposed exploiters in Ador celebrated the groups 3rd anniversary yet their mother isn't mentioning anything about her own group she supposedly cherished She probably doesn't even remember their debut date