[Edaily Reporter Jeong Yun-ji ] Belief Lab and Source Music, labels under HYBE, have both lost their lawsuits seeking damages against former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin. The court ruled that it was difficult to conclusively determine that former CEO Min’s statements regarding allegations that Ailette imitated NewJeans and the debut process of NewJeans members were false.

On the 13th, Civil Division 12 of the Seoul Western District Court (Presiding Judge Kim Jin-young) dismissed Belief Lab’s claim for 2 billion won in damages against former CEO Min. The court also rejected Source Music’s claim for 500 million won in damages.

The court viewed former CEO Min’s remarks at a press conference in April 2024—in which she suggested that Ailette’s hairstyles, makeup, outfits, and choreography imitated those of NewJeans—as a personal evaluation rather than a statement of specific facts. The court reasoned that the public can judge for themselves how similar the two groups’ content is by viewing the actual works.

The court noted that since it is difficult to determine whether a work has been imitated based solely on objective criteria, a process involving diverse criticism and opinions is necessary. The court explained that if legal liability were easily imposed for criticism of artistic works, it would become difficult to voice critical opinions, which could ultimately have a negative impact on the development of the arts.

The court ruled that even if former CEO Min had mentioned certain facts, this did not constitute a violation of the law. It held that the remarks concerned matters of public interest and fell within the scope permitted by freedom of expression.

The court also ruled that the remarks regarding NewJeans’ debut process—which Source Music had taken issue with—could not be considered false. Former CEO Min had argued that Source Music had failed to properly manage the NewJeans members during their trainee period and that situations during the debut process differed from what had been promised.

The court found that, given former CEO Min’s role in the recruitment and training of NewJeans members, it was difficult to conclusively label his remarks as false. It also ruled that some of the harsh language directed at Source Music could not be considered an unlawful personal attack when viewed within the context of the remarks at the time. Even if the company’s public reputation had suffered, the court found no illegality, as the issues raised were in the public interest.

However, the 5 billion won counterclaim filed by former CEO Min against Belief Lab was also dismissed. Former CEO Min argued that the economic value of NewJeans and ADOR had declined due to Ailette’s imitation of NewJeans, resulting in damages to him personally. In response, the court ruled that NewJeans’ reputation and achievements belong to ADOR and other related corporations, not to former CEO Min personally. The court also ruled that the critical remarks Belief Lab made toward former CEO Min constituted the expression of an opinion.

This lawsuit followed former CEO Min’s allegations at a press conference in April 2024 that Ailette had imitated NewJeans. In June of that year, Belief Lab filed a lawsuit seeking 2 billion won in damages, claiming that the remarks defamed the company and its artists. In July of the same year, Source Music also filed a lawsuit seeking 500 million won, alleging that statements regarding the casting and debut process of NewJeans members were false.

Both sides have stated their intention to appeal the first-instance ruling. Belief Lab argued, “It is deeply regrettable that the ruling implied there are victims but no perpetrators,” adding, “Even though the victims and the facts of the wrongdoing are clear, if a hasty acquittal is granted on the grounds of ‘expression of opinion’ or ‘rhetorical expression,’ there will continue to be a second and third wave of victims.”

Source Music also stated, “We feel regret and a sense of helplessness at the reality that the evidence we submitted, which clearly points to the truth, has not been protected by the law,” adding, “Former CEO Min’s reckless and false statements caused immense damage to our label, where trust between trainees and artists is paramount. “We will immediately file an appeal to rectify the injustice of the first-instance ruling, protect our artists, and strive to the very end to uncover the objective truth,” the company added.

On the other hand, former CEO Min’s side welcomed the ruling, stating that the court had made a common-sense decision. They said, “Through repeated trial delays and changes to the cause of action, the plaintiff has consistently engaged in unscrupulous behavior, showing from the outset no intention of proceeding with the lawsuit expeditiously,” adding, “We will use this ruling as an opportunity to put an end to this wasteful controversy and will respond resolutely in accordance with established principles to foster a healthy industry environment.”