[theqoo] KAKAO'S KIM BEOMSU, ACQUITTED IN FIRST TRIAL OVER SM STOCK MANIPULATION

    [theqoo] KAKAO'S KIM BEOMSU, ACQUITTED IN FIRST TRIAL OVER SM STOCK MANIPULATION


    image (7).png



    1. Looks like they had no proofs


    2. HYBE are f*ckers


    3. So why did the prosecutor requested 15 years for?


    4. But this isn't the only issue with Kakao though ㅋㅋㅋ


    5. HYBE ㅋㅋㅋ They're freaking low ㅋㅋ They were doing this when they were the ones doing the stock manipulation


    6. So there's no proofs at all, that's why he didn't get punished right?


    7. Look at everyone being quiet in this article


    8. I just looked it up, and this is it ㅋㅋㅋㅋ HYBE wanted to acquire SM and cut Kakao off, and they were supposed to get a search and seizure of SM, but they had no proofs


    "Explaining the HYBE-Kakao article:

    0. HYBE submitted a petition to the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), kicking off the Kakao-SM stock manipulation case.

    1. It reportedly took the FSS only 10 days to release the result report, an exceptionally fast turnaround compared to other similar petitions.

    2. But once the trial began, the prosecution wasted time by relying on a large volume of materials and strategic witness sequencing rather than presenting solid evidence.

    3. The first trial alone has been ongoing for a year, and the investigation keeps getting extended.

    4. The business world is starting to suspect there might be other motives behind the investigation.


    9. HYBE again?


    10. When will HYBE flop



    source: https://theqoo.net/hot/3960334706

    Basically, HYBE’s accusation that Kakao manipulated SM’s stock price to block its takeover was dismissed by the court as unproven. The judge found no deliberate interference with HYBE’s tender offer and condemned the investigation for “distorting the truth.”


    What does this all mean?


    The court’s ruling exposes HYBE’s alignment with prosecutorial overreach. The judges went out of their way to rebuke the prosecution, stating that the investigation “distorted the truth” and relied on false testimony extracted under pressure. The prosecution’s aggressive stance in this case eerily echoed HYBE’s own accusations at the time. They mirrored HYBE’s talking points about Kakao’s alleged stock manipulation almost word for word. The judge’s statement essentially implies that the entire investigation was built on a flawed or biased premise, one likely influenced by HYBE’s framing. This indirectly raises serious questions about HYBE’s ethical influence on market regulators and the justice system, suggesting that the company may have leveraged its elite connections to weaponize legal institutions against its rivals.


    This ruling also reinforces the perception of HYBE as a corporate aggressor. Public opinion during the SM takeover battle was already critical of HYBE’s hostile tactics, from attempting to absorb SM to replacing its leadership and centralizing creative control. The court’s decision vindicates Kakao and SM’s resistance as a legitimate defense, not “manipulation.” It paints HYBE not as a visionary conglomerate, but as a monopolistic force willing to use both media play and legal pressure to suppress competition. This deeply damages HYBE’s long-term credibility as a “fair player” in the K-pop industry, especially as it faces growing scrutiny and similar accusations of monopolistic behavior in the ADOR–NewJeans conflict.


    Finally, the verdict weakens HYBE’s moral authority in its ongoing disputes. The company’s current battles, like the one against Min Hee-jin and NewJeans, often hinge on portraying itself as a victim of betrayal or misconduct. But this ruling serves as a stark reminder that HYBE has a pattern of exaggerating accusations and bending narratives to maintain control. It lends weight to critics who argue that HYBE manipulates both media and institutions to preserve its dominance, ultimately undermining its credibility in every conflict it engages in whether it's in the present or in the future.


    This ruling doesn’t just exonerate Kakao... it exposes HYBE’s pattern of narrative control, legal opportunism, and monopolistic behavior.


    (->honestly it's everyhting i was accusing them off...)


    HYBE didn’t just lose the SM war, it lost the credibility war, too.


    source full article: https://n.news.naver.com/article/001/0015691289?sid=102


    ---


    What do you think BIGnorBANG and Yama-Chan ?


    BunniesTaglist

    Now the nasty Ozempic man has to contend with TWO enemies...


    Since Mr KAKAO has been acquitted, he's going to go full throttle to stake Bongo, since he was the reason why he was on trial in the first place. Mr KAKAO will no doubt have dirt on Bongo, or will go out of his way to acquire dirt on him.


    It was bad enough that Gramps will be coming back in February. To have THIS guy compound it... He's gonna face threats musically AND legally, even more than before...😬

    In addition, there has been an appeal to review the case against BSH because of this, which could involve an arrest warrant for Bongo, too.


    (Won't link because of megathread reasons.)

    Without getting into the weeds of critiquing HYBE's seemingly non-existent corporate governance, and the honestly amateurish way they mobilize their money and resources like your stereotypical evil organization you'd find in some anime subplot, I think it's another massive L for them.


    Just as the articles articulates, it destroys their credibility. Are any of the accusations they've made the past 2 years remotely true, or are they all just projections made by the real crooks of the industry?

    Quote from Jasque-O-Part2

    Grok explain as if I was 5

    This dude in the k comments did simplify it tho :meme-erm: :



    "Explaining the HYBE-Kakao article:


    0. HYBE submitted a petition to the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), kicking off the Kakao-SM stock manipulation case.


    1. It reportedly took the FSS only 10 days to release the result report, an exceptionally fast turnaround compared to other similar petitions.


    2. But once the trial began, the prosecution wasted time by relying on a large volume of materials and strategic witness sequencing rather than presenting solid evidence.


    3. The first trial alone has been ongoing for a year, and the investigation keeps getting extended.


    4. The business world is starting to suspect there might be other motives behind the investigation.

    Bureaucracy is always good comedy to me


    Trials like this sound more like a tragedy for the people involved though

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login