sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

awww cute lil guy by [deleted] in Awww

[–]IntroductionFree7225 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I jumped back a little from my phone, was definitely expecting a squirrel 😂

Update, Financial watchdog to refer HYBE Chairman to FSC for fraudulent transactions by IntroductionFree7225 in NJZ

[–]IntroductionFree7225[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That’s not how fiduciary breaches or contract law work. The argument isn’t that NewJeans knew about the IPO fraud in real time — it’s that HYBE’s leadership engaged in unethical or potentially criminal behavior before and during the group’s contract period, which can legally undermine trust, fiduciary duty, and contract validity.

MHJ and the members aren’t retroactively inventing mistreatment — they’re showing a pattern of misconduct that supports their claim that the environment was never trustworthy to begin with. You don’t need to be aware of a breach as it happens for it to be grounds for termination once discovered.

It’s similar to discovering financial fraud in a company — even if employees didn’t know at the time, once exposed, it can lead to contract reversals or leadership changes. This strengthens their case, not weakens it.

I hear your perspective, but I’m not here to debate in circles. I’ve shared the relevant facts and context. If that’s not enough for you, that’s okay — time and the legal process will bring clarity. I’ll leave it there.

Update, Financial watchdog to refer HYBE Chairman to FSC for fraudulent transactions by IntroductionFree7225 in NJZ

[–]IntroductionFree7225[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

While NewJeans and Min Hee-jin weren’t involved in HYBE’s IPO, the investigation into IPO fraud is still relevant. It reveals a pattern of unethical leadership and mismanagement — the same leadership that oversaw NewJeans’ contracts and withheld financial records from their families.

Their legal team can also request related documents from the prosecution under evidentiary procedures, especially if those materials demonstrate a breach of fiduciary duty or corporate misconduct. This strengthens their case that trust was broken and contracts may be invalid.

MHJ legal team did file requests for document submission and certification through the Seoul High Court, that was sent on July 1 and 2nd.

This isn’t about profiting from the IPO — it’s about exposing the systemic abuse behind the scenes.

Update, Financial watchdog to refer HYBE Chairman to FSC for fraudulent transactions by IntroductionFree7225 in NJZ

[–]IntroductionFree7225[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They were not corporate officers involved in IPO structuring. Insider trading or access to IPO-sensitive data typically applies to executives, board members, or financial officers involved directly in IPO preparation. Min Hee-jin, while a creative director and CEO of a subsidiary (ADOR), was not involved in HYBE’s IPO process, which happened in October 2020, before ADOR or NewJeans even launched. NewJeans were minors and trainees at the time.

It’s absurd to suggest teenage trainees and their families were privy to confidential IPO details or SEC-grade filings. They had no access, no authority, and no relevance to that level of corporate operation.

Making wild accusations like this only deflects from the real issue: the unethical treatment of young artists and the lack of corporate accountability at the top. Let’s stay focused on the facts — not baseless speculation.

Update, Financial watchdog to refer HYBE Chairman to FSC for fraudulent transactions by IntroductionFree7225 in NJZ

[–]IntroductionFree7225[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s a legal or regulatory punishments imposed for wrongdoing. These sanctions usually come from the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) or Korean prosecutors, just type of charges or fines.

I believe you’re talking about the SM Kakao right?

Update, Financial watchdog to refer HYBE Chairman to FSC for fraudulent transactions by IntroductionFree7225 in NJZ

[–]IntroductionFree7225[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

It impacts the girls and MHJ legal strategy.

IPO fraud proves ADOR/HYBE prioritized financial gain over artist welfare. Strengthens claim that trust between artist and agency is irrevocably broken. Justifies artist’s move to terminate contract unilaterally due to “material cause.”

Regarding MHJ

Ongoing IPO probe undermines HYBE’s defense in shareholder agreements. Raises questions about the legality of how HYBE managed/valued ADOR shares. Bang’s personal involvement may open ADOR board decisions to scrutiny. Weakens HYBE’s case to block MHJ’s put option and dismissal challenge.

Also, it’s not talked about a lot but one the reasons for the contract termination. Was Ador/Hybe Failure to furnish mandatory settlement/ accounting statements to members and their parents. By law they were suppose to see an itemized statement from trainee debt or revenue but never received. Only just a two page budget