News No Paper Trail, No Proof? EXO-CBX and SM Debate Verbal Agreement in Court (1 Viewer)

[Selfmate]

EXO-CBX and SM Entertainment clash in court over alleged verbal agreements, raising deeper questions about transparency and contracts in K-pop.

On April 23, the Seoul Eastern District Court held its first hearing regarding the mutual lawsuits filed by the three members Chen, Baekhyun, and Xiumin and their agency. At the center of the dispute lies a crucial disagreement: whether a verbal agreement regarding profit distribution ever existed.

SM Entertainment firmly denied the claim, arguing that the trio’s assertion specifically about receiving 10% of revenue in exchange for guaranteed distribution commission rates lacks both legal and logical grounding. The company emphasized that previous criminal complaints related to this issue had already resulted in a “no charges” decision by investigative authorities.

However, EXO-CBX’s legal team pushed back, insisting that such conclusions are not absolute. They argued that the absence of written documentation does not automatically invalidate the possibility of an agreement, especially in an industry where informal arrangements have historically existed.

SM also highlighted that EXO-CBX had already received settlement payments amounting to approximately 50 billion KRW (around $36 million USD), questioning why the artists would now demand further financial transparency.

In response, the trio claimed they had never been provided with detailed sales contracts or revenue breakdowns for albums and concerts documents that are typically essential for verifying proper settlements. This claim shifts the narrative from a simple contractual disagreement to a broader issue of transparency within K-pop management systems.


This legal battle is more than just a financial disagreement it reflects ongoing tensions between artists and agencies in the K-pop industry. Over the years, disputes over contract fairness, revenue distribution, and artist rights have increasingly come into the spotlight.

For EXO-CBX, the case represents a fight for accountability and clarity. For SM Entertainment, it is about maintaining contractual integrity and defending its business practices.

The next hearing is scheduled for June 18, and industry watchers are closely monitoring how this case could set a precedent for future artist-agency relationships.

Source: https://kbizoom.com/exo-cbx-sm-ente...eement/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=threads

@EXOL

 

[centen]

They argued that the absence of written documentation does not automatically invalidate the possibility of an agreement, especially in an industry where informal arrangements have historically existed.

This is true, actually, but we've had quite a few cases lately where that lack of documentation has screwed people over.

It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

 

[Selfmate]

This is true, actually, but we've had quite a few cases lately where that lack of documentation has screwed people over.

It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

As far as I know written documentation usually triumphs over verbal agreements to the extent of any inconsistencies and written documentation is usually better evidence than he said/she said

 

[centen]

As far as I know written documentation usually triumphs over verbal agreements to the extent of any inconsistencies and written documentation is usually better evidence than he said/she said

Oh, absolutely. But you can legally enter into a contract that's entirely verbal and not written. It's just... kind of reckless to do so when you've got a lot on the line.