Will Adore Min Hee-jin’s ‘crime of breach of trust’ be established? Legal profession “unlikely” – Legal Newspaper VRESP

With the recent growing conflict over management rights between the agency Hive and its subsidiary Adore CEO Min Hee-jin, attention is being paid to whether a breach of trust will be established.

According to the police on the 29th, Hive filed a complaint with the Yongsan Police Station in Seoul on the 26th against CEO Min and Vice-CEO Mr. A of Adore, New Jeans’ agency, on charges of breach of trust. An investigation into the accuser, an investigation into related references, and an investigation into the accused will be conducted sequentially.

Hive claims that CEO Min is suspected of breach of duty toward the Adore company by establishing a plan to seize management rights from Adore. Evidence includes data containing a plan to seize management rights received from one of the audit subjects and contact with external investors. The data said that CEO Min instructed management to “come up with a way to pressure Hive to sell its share of Adore.”

Accordingly, methods such as terminating the exclusive contract with the artist (New Genes) were discussed, and messenger conversations such as ‘making Adore into an empty shell and taking him out’ were explained.

The legal community predicts that based on these details alone, it is unlikely that a crime of breach of trust will be established. The crime of breach of trust is based on the fact that the actor violates his/her business duties and acquires property profits himself or causes a third party to acquire property profits.

Yang Jin-young (bar exam 52nd), a lawyer at Minhoo Law Firm, said, “(For a crime of professional breach of trust), there must be a violation of one’s duties and cause concern or damage to property,” adding, “The KakaoTalk conversation that has been reported in the media right now is “(From Hive’s perspective) it is an ‘attempt to usurp management rights,’ but it is difficult to view this attempt itself as ‘breach of trust.’”

Song Hye-mi (4th time taking the bar exam), a lawyer at Opeth Law Firm, also said, “It is difficult to establish a crime of breach of trust simply by saying that it was planned because there is no preliminary offense.” “If there is other concrete evidence that shows that something was carried out, even though it has not been revealed now, it may be possible to establish it.” “He explained.

However, there is also the view that if CEO Min’s ‘contract leak’ is true, there is a possibility that he will be punished. Previously, Hive claimed that CEO Min and others leaked confidential contracts to attract investors.

A lawyer in charge of corporate advisory said, “(Based on what has been said so far), it cannot be said that CEO Min has begun specific implementation steps to seize management rights,” adding, “However, CEO Min leaked contracts, etc. to a third party and gave them to Adore. “If damage has been caused, breach of trust, etc. may be applied,” he explained.

He also pointed out, “If some of the contents of Representative Min’s press conference violated the contract between Hive and shareholders (confidentiality compliance, etc.), Hive may seek compensation for damages, including penalty of breach of contract, from Representative Min.”

Meanwhile, CEO Min is known to have sent a reply email to Hive on the morning of the 29th saying, ‘We will not convene the board of directors requested for the 30th.’ The reason is that Hive’s request to replace Adore’s CEO and internal board members is illegal, and the auditor’s convening of the board of directors is also illegal because it is outside of the authority.

Hive has requested permission to convene an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders from the court on the 25th. A court decision usually takes about 4 to 5 weeks after filing.

/Reporter Oh In-ae