As this is just a professional opinions not the update on the case, I think it should be allowed to stand by itself, right?
As the conflict between Hybe, Korea's largest music agency, and Min Hee-jin, CEO of its subsidiary label Ador, intensifies, attention is focused on how Hybe will conclude the 'charges of breach of trust in office' that Hybe accused CEO Min of.
According to the legal community on the 27th, CEO Min is currently being reported to the police on charges of breach of trust, etc., following Hybe's claim that she attempted to usurp Adore's management rights. However, the prevailing view is that if the breach of trust was not actually committed and no damage occurred to Hybe, it would be difficult to bring charges.
Lee Hyeon-gon, former judge and CEO of Saeol Law Firm, wrote on Facebook the previous day, “I do not understand whether Hybe’s claim meets the requirements for breach of trust,” and “usurpation of management rights is a legally meaningless claim.” He pointed out that he does not understand the logic of why Ador's manager (Min Hee-jin) is accused of usurping management rights.
Attorney Lee said, “Even if CEO Min tried to increase the stock stake by bringing in investors, I don’t know why that would be a breach of trust, regardless of whether it was implemented or not.” He added, “Hostile M&A is also legally done, but receiving external investment does not cause any damage to the company.” “Isn’t that right?” he said.
He also said, “Even though it is the parent company and the majority shareholder, it is a separate and independent corporation with a different shareholder composition than its affiliates.” “There is a possibility that this could amount to a breach of trust,” he added.
Attorney A, another former chief judge, said, “Hybe’s accusation against Min Hee-jin seems to be ‘intentionally causing damage to the company by lowering the company’s value in order to benefit the company,’ but it does not seem likely to be a breach of trust.” He added, “The attempt itself. “Not only are there not many crimes that are punished, but this is especially true for economic crimes,” he told Edaily.
In addition, several lawyers also said, “The crime of breach of trust cannot be established through conspiracy alone.” “If it is just a discussion stage, it is difficult to punish breach of trust because there are no provisions for punishment for preparation or conspiracy.” “Hybe cited KakaoTalk messages as the basis for breach of trust.” “It is questionable whether a crime of breach of trust will be established to this extent,” they said in unison.
However, the legal opinion is that there is room for dispute if there is clear evidence that CEO Min initiated the act of breach of trust with the knowledge that damage could occur to Hybe or that property damage actually occurred to Hybe.
In relation to this, Representative Min completely denied his suspicions in a radio interview on the 26th following a press conference on the 25th. Representative Min appeared on CBS Radio's 'Kim Hyun-jung's News Show' and said, "I don't know if imagination is a sin," and added, "I have listened to various opinions, sometimes seriously, sometimes lightly. “It seems so strange to piece together all of this and drive it forward,” she said. She then emphasized, “No matter what I try to do, I must receive Hybe's approval (with 80% of Adore’s shares), and I cannot do anything with this share (CEO Min’s 20%) on my own.”
Shin Sejong Law Firm, which served as legal representation for Representative Min, also said, “There is no preliminary offense in breach of trust. He added the opinion, “No maritime acts were found in the data released by Hybe, and conspiracy alone does not constitute breach of trust.
********
Conspiracy theories on why they ask her to resign by herself first and publicized this controversy instead of handling it in silent to pressure her. They probably really didn't want her in Hybe anymore.
