Min Heejin Issued A Statement May 19 (Patreon)

https://m.entertain.naver.com/now/article/609/0000855339

FULL TRANSLATION BELOW THE TLDR VERSION

TLDR VERSION: 

1- She admitted to meeting w/ Dunamu and Naver. However, she said it was the investor who wanted to meet her and she agreed to meet because they are interested in NJ and her as a producer. It was the VP of Ador that raised the idea that Dunamu would be ideal to own ADOR but they knew it couldn't happen unless Hybe agrees. Her saying she never met with any investor in a press conference meant she never met with an investor with the Intention of taking over ADOR.

2- The Kakaotalk messages contain rude remarks about NJ is out of context. "Complex human relationships cannot be explained simply with a few snippets of KKT conversations." NJ members already texted her and expressed support. They have become more than family and their bond is beyond what people can imagine. Hybe is trying to vilify her.

3- She works with very few people by choice but she is surprised that many have been talking about her like they have worked closely with her before. Hybe conducted a forensic examination on her laptop (that Hybe provided) without her consent and included her personal life details. Hybe also took the laptop of the VP too and threatened the VP with criminal liability.

4 if what Hybe wants is to investigate if there has been efforts to take over ADOR, there is no need for a large-scale media campaign. The process should have been discreet.

English Translation.

Note: This is AI translated, corrected by human.

Hello, this is Min Heejin.

For the first time since my press conference, I am writing to share my personal perspective.

I chose to write this article instead of issuing a formal statement because the context and nuances of the issue I want to address are better conveyed informally.

I understand that some of you might question why this matter concerns you, and I apologize if this appears irrelevant. However, since April 22nd, I have faced numerous embarrassing and challenging days. I feel it is necessary to address the misunderstandings and false claims made by HYBE in court.

You've likely seen my candid personality during press conferences, so I will speak openly and without reservations.

Honesty is crucial here because the issue at hand is not strictly formal, solemn, or serious. I am sharing my firsthand experiences and rejecting any prejudiced views that may trivialize these serious matters.

1- 

I'd like to address the recent issue involving Naver and Dunamu.

On March 6, 2024, my acquaintance, Mr. A, invited me to dinner at 7:30 PM. He assured me not to feel uncomfortable as the guests were his old friends, who were older than me and friendly.

During the meal, one of A's acquaintances mentioned calling another person to join us. About an hour later, someone arrived, and I initially didn't recognize him. When he introduced himself, I realized he was C from Dunamu, someone who had expressed interest in meeting me through Chairman Bang Si-hyuk a long time ago. C stated that he knew I would be at the dinner and wanted to attend because he was very interested in NEWJEANS and curious about me as a producer. Person B from Naver, who was also close to the attendees, joined us later. Despite my intentions, the meeting turned into a private gathering unrelated to investment, with all attendees willing to testify to this.

Contrary to HYBE's exaggerated media campaign, that was the extent of my meeting with Dunamu C. HYBE, which did not attend the meeting, has no basis for its false claims.

C expressed interest in attending NEWJEANS' Tokyo Dome performance, and our conversation briefly touched on the event. Afterward, I only exchanged a few personal messages with Person B. On my way home, I mentioned the people I met to Vice President L, who suggested that it would be beneficial if Dunamu, a company that invested in HYBE, became the owner of ADOR. We had a vague conversation about mutual benefits, but we knew it couldn't happen without HYBE's consent. Since it was my first time meeting Dunamu C, no substantial conversation about this matter took place.

Despite the feasibility, the idea momentarily provided a sense of relief. As the CEO of ADOR, I have often felt like an 'outcast' suffering subtle harassment within HYBE. Is it a crime to imagine wanting to escape from such a situation? In a world where thoughts aren't censored, this shouldn't be an issue. I also wish I could censor the thoughts of HYBE executives.

Vice President L, upon joining ADOR, was surprised by the extent of harassment from HYBE and asked how I had been coping. Consequently, we only discussed ways to avoid harassment and respond to it, but HYBE maliciously edited and presented these conversations as if we had planned a significant action.

It's hard to believe I need to explain a private meeting in such detail, as if defending against charges of high treason. Have you discovered the truth behind Saudi Arabia's national wealth, as you so seriously claimed?

It's astonishing that HYBE exploits acquaintances and situations for their benefit. Our first meeting at a dinner with friends does not justify an acquisition proposal. I reiterate, if clarification is needed, I request a face-to-face meeting with all involved parties, including HYBE.

I have never proposed an acquisition to Naver or Dunamu, so please verify if HYBE has received any such offer from them. Ensure the confirmation isn't just about the 'meeting,' but about the 'purpose of the meeting and the conversation.'

Regardless of the facts, I anticipated that my experience might be misrepresented in headlines. My statement, "I didn’t meet the investor," means "we did not meet to discuss usurping management rights," and I hope you're not misled by obvious wordplay.

People have various social roles: CEO, lawyer, doctor, teacher, etc. A meeting, regardless of the presence of an investment company representative, can remain a parents' meeting and not an investors' meeting.

Even if a CEO or vice president meets with an investor, what's the issue? Are other HYBE subsidiary CEOs scrutinized for meeting investors and business partners?

Why were there no suggestions for meetings or inquiries before the audit? According to the “subsidiary investigation rights under the Commercial Act,” the parent company's audit committee should first request an investigation report on a subsidiary. If the subsidiary doesn't respond adequately, then the parent company can conduct an audit.

I assert that all evidence presented by HYBE was illegally obtained. No matter how much you insist, you cannot create something from nothing.

2

For the first time since my press conference, I am writing to share my personal perspective on the recent issues involving Naver and Dunamu.

I chose to write this article informally because the context and nuances of the matter cannot be adequately conveyed through an official statement.

I understand some of you might question the relevance of this issue to you, and I apologize if this seems unwarranted. However, since April 22nd, I've faced numerous challenging days. I feel compelled to address the misunderstandings and false claims made by HYBE in court, to minimize confusion.

Complex human relationships cannot be explained simply with a few snippets from KakaoTalk conversations. It's not something that can be easily dismissed and judged by those unfamiliar with the context, the style of conversation, or the individuals involved. Anyone manipulated by HYBE's tactics might find themselves in my position. NEWJEANS and I have shared many experiences and situations that are too complex to explain here. Revealing them would involve discussing personal information, which could cause further harm and division.

Running a business in a prejudiced environment, especially with young artists and others' money, has been more challenging than I imagined. Most people, including myself, are not born wealthy. Raising funds for a business is incredibly difficult, and even for those without money, securing investment through talent is a skill. Starting a business with investment is not a sin. Within a short period, I have repaid over ten times the initial investment, yet I am unfairly labeled a traitor and egomaniac. The value I've provided to HYBE should not be overlooked.

Balancing profit and the well-being of young artists is fraught with contradictions. If I had been less obsessive or just a salaried manager, it might have been easier. My passion and sense of responsibility have sometimes been a burden, but looking back, I have no regrets.

NEWJEANS and I have become like a family, but our bond is even deeper. After being attacked with misleading KakaoTalk messages, the members sent me heartfelt messages of support. This situation has been distressing, not because of the criticism from strangers, but because of the impact on everyone involved.

If you care about NEWJEANS, please help prevent them from being dragged into unrelated issues. Despite my struggles with this situation, I cannot let it affect the members' future.

Suing malicious YouTube channels has been an obsession of mine, as sharing personal information with such channels is harmful. It feels ironic to be in this situation now.

People might suggest that I should give up, but considering everything we've been through, that's not an option. I constantly reflect on who and what this work is for.

We took the risk of whistleblowing because there is a value we want to protect. Pursuing legal action is not about money. Anyone who knows me understands this.

I've wanted to leave this absurd and money-driven industry many times. This ordeal has made me question my efforts, but I am reminded that there is always a good cause to hold on to.

HYBE's actions have already caused harm to NEWJEANS. I feel terrible about the situation and those responsible. People are not dolls to be manipulated by others' judgments. Each person's life is precious and should not be decided by those who have never worked with them.

No matter how much HYBE tries to vilify me, they do not know me better than I know myself.

3-

Living in the world, conflict is sometimes unavoidable. Although I dislike conflict, I acknowledge it as a necessary, albeit painful, process for growth. Despite my tendency towards self-deprecation, I try to embrace this difficult reality with a positive outlook.

I do not take sides or seek support based on personal trouble, nor do I appeal to any particular group or gender. Human individuality is not simply determined by gender, and different characteristics imply different reasons for existence.

I am a thoughtful person with many concerns. Those who know me understand that I always have reasons and explanations for everything. Therefore, it's unfair to judge my thoughts or philosophy based on fragmented pieces that lack context and perspective.

Due to this tendency, I work with a small group of people. Only about five members at ADOR communicate with me in detail, which is partly due to personal trauma.

In my previous job, I constantly faced stress from being slandered or lied about, despite rarely engaging in outside activities. I don't enjoy drinking, smoking, or entertainment, and have a history of seeking treatment for stress, so I minimized meetings for self-defense.

I was surprised to hear that many people spoke as if they had worked closely with me, even though I had little direct communication with anyone outside ADOR. I am genuinely grateful for the support messages from our members.

This incident reminded me of something CEO Jiwon Park once said. He recalled hearing about how well he handled restructuring at his previous job and what needed attention. At the time, I wasn't interested, so I ignored it, but now it has come back to me.

HYBE used the laptop I received when I joined the company, reset it, and returned it two years ago. Before the audit, they conducted a forensic examination without my consent, shared my personal life details, and included them in the audit document. How does this relate to ADOR?

In an open court, knowing that dozens of reporters were present, they did not present any legal arguments but instead read out some of my private remarks in a provocative tone. I wasn't in the courtroom at the time and only heard about it later, and I find it appalling that someone could harm a person's privacy and reputation this way.

They disclosed my personal history before ADOR's establishment, took the vice-president's laptop without permission, and threatened the vice-president with criminal liability. They pressured ADOR members, demanded their personal phones, and leaked private conversations.

Despite these unreasonable acts, they claim to protect our members. I question the sincerity of their gratitude.

HYBE, which inspected even private KakaoTalk conversations, must be aware of how much content was favorable to me and unfavorable to them in the unedited context.

Considering the 'right to investigate subsidiaries under the Commercial Act,' we question HYBE's moral insensitivity and the low-level actions they have committed through illegal audits conducted by 'their own standards.'

4 

If the aim is truly to conduct an audit and evidence of management rights usurpation has been secured, there is no need for a large-scale media campaign. The proper approach would be to handle the matter swiftly and discreetly, using accurate evidence and a legitimate audit process, and then publicly announce the results. This would prevent any decline in stock price and avoid unnecessary conflict.

The core issue of the current conflict is a serious problem that threatens the future of many people, including myself, and we are trying to find the best way to overcome it.

This situation is not a public trial against me based on fragmented, biased information, and fabrications.

We are currently in the midst of a legal dispute.

We must wait for the judge's decision based on the facts.

I am frustrated with HYBE's malicious use of out-of-context topics and fabrications to mislead people. Even more concerning is that if this behavior is allowed, it won't only apply to me in the future. That's why I won't give up.

I didn't see the petition that Chairman Bang Si-hyuk submitted, but I was struck by the use of the word 'evil' in the headline. This reminded me that the same word can have very different connotations.

The articles are based on unfounded facts.

Once an unfounded article is published, it creates a false narrative, and the process of clarifying the truth becomes complicated. It is easy to be misled by the first argument.

Given this, it is difficult for the public to discern the truth. Therefore, it is best to calmly wait for the court's ruling and then take appropriate steps, rather than being influenced by indiscriminate articles.

I would like to conclude by apologizing for any unavoidable noise and inconvenience caused.

Thank you. 

ADOR CEO Min Heejin