"Min Hee-jin Was Central to the Deal": HYBE Rebuts Claims Over NewJeans Contract

HYBE has disputed a New York Times report that NewJeans' exclusive contract omitted protections for minors. The company said those protections were included in a separate agreement and that the members and their parents had reviewed the contract terms before signing.

HYBE and its subsidiary ADOR, which manages NewJeans, released a statement on Nov. 6 in response to a New York Times report published the previous day.

The Times reported that it had obtained the exclusive contract NewJeans signed with ADOR in 2022 and had asked five legal experts to review it. According to the report, the contract omitted provisions protecting minors' rights to sleep, education and rest that appear in the South Korean government's standard contract template. It also required the members to repay a substantial share of plastic surgery and skin-care costs incurred during their trainee years, the Times reported.

"HYBE's labels sign the government's standard supplementary agreement for minors with all their trainees," the company said. "The supplementary agreement includes all protective provisions, including personality rights and the rights to sleep, education and rest, and remains valid until the artist reaches adulthood." HYBE added that the NewJeans contract itself also contains provisions protecting the members' basic human rights.

HYBE also disputed claims that the members had insufficient input during contract negotiations. The company said a draft was shared on Jan. 7, 2022, before the contract was signed in April of that year. The roughly three-month process included question-and-answer sessions, email exchanges and discussions of revisions following reviews by legal representatives for some of the members. HYBE said a court had also recognized that the contract was signed after extensive discussions between the two sides.

On cost sharing, HYBE said its legal team had proposed ways to reduce the members' share of expenses, but ADOR's vice president at the time rejected them.

"Regarding cost sharing, one mother asked whether the artists' share of the costs could be reduced," HYBE said. "Our legal team prepared several options to accommodate the request and presented them to ADOR, but ADOR's then-vice president rejected them, and the contract was signed on the current terms."

The company also addressed the contract's formula for calculating contractual penalties. HYBE said the clause applies only when an artist "unilaterally terminates the contract during its term, or breaches key provisions with the intention of terminating it, even though the company is faithfully fulfilling its obligations."

Under the NewJeans contract, the penalty is based on average monthly revenue during periods in which the group actually generated revenue. . In response to concerns that excluding periods with no revenue could increase the penalty, HYBE said NewJeans began generating revenue immediately after debut and continues to do so through streaming and other sources. The company said the calculation therefore produced the same as it would be under the standard contract.

"In the lawsuit involving Danielle, the penalty was calculated using exactly the same formula as in the standard contract," HYBE said. "During the NewJeans exclusive contract dispute, the Seoul High Court also reviewed the clause in detail and explicitly found no issue with it."

The Times also reported on a clause allowing ADOR to use the members' likenesses and voices after the contract ends. "AI content can, of course, be used only with each artist's individual consent," HYBE said. The company added that a former agency could violate unfair competition laws or other South Korean laws if it used an artist's intellectual property without authorization for additional commercial activities after the artist had signed with a new agency. HYBE said it had no plans to use an artist's intellectual property in violation of the law.

HYBE said clauses restricting the members' private lives and public statements were intended to protect the artists. On the defamation clause, it said, "The inclusion of this clause means artists must not commit acts that constitute criminal defamation." The company said the restriction on "inappropriate romantic relationships" was also necessary to protect the artists and that their parents had agreed to the terms.

The company also addressed concerns about security cameras and education. HYBE said CCTV cameras are installed only in shared spaces, such as practice rooms, to ensure safety and prevent crime. It said it respects the wishes of artists and their parents regarding their education.

"We explained to The New York Times, with supporting documents, that then-CEO Min Hee-jin, the vice president she appointed, the members and their parents, and legal representatives for some of the members had jointly negotiated the wording of the NewJeans contract before it was signed," HYBE said. "We also asked the article to make clear Min Hee-jin's role in negotiating and finalizing the contract, but that request was not accepted."

"Contracts and litigation materials held only by the parties involved have been leaked to foreign media and are being used as a tool to attack K-POP," the company added. "We therefore have no choice but to provide this explanation."