ADOR Vs Danielle 33 Billion KRW Damages Lawsuit: How Min Hee-Jin’s Involvement Might Decide The Final Result

The legal battle between ADOR and NewJeans member Danielle has stretched onto the fourth hearing of the agency’s 33 billion KRW damages lawsuit on July 23. While the case centers on whether ADOR suffered financial losses after Danielle terminated her exclusive contract, much of the discussion focused on a crucial question – how much of NewJeans’ commercial success depended on former ADOR CEO Min Hee-Jin. As both sides debated how future revenue should be calculated, a court-appointed financial expert suggested that Min Hee-Jin’s involvement alone could not be treated as a guarantee of success.

As per Korean media, the fourth hearing took place at the Seoul Central District Court, where ADOR requested the court-appointed financial expert to estimate the revenue NewJeans would likely have generated had Danielle continued promoting under the agency. According to reports, ADOR asked the expert to calculate “the sales that would have been generated if Danielle had continued activities at ADOR.” The valuation is expected to play a key role in determining whether the agency is entitled to damages and, if so, how much compensation it should receive.

However, Danielle’s legal team questioned whether such projections could be made through accounting alone. Her counsel argued that estimating future earnings requires more than simply reviewing financial records. According to the defense, ‘ success depended on several non-financial factors, including the agency’s production system, staff structure, artist-management trust and the group’s overall working environment.

The defense also argued that the group’s previous financial success was achieved under Min Hee-Jin’s leadership, making it difficult to assume the same results would have continued after her departure. Among the factors raised by ‘s side were the breakdown of trust between ADOR and the members before the contracts were terminated, the company’s alleged decline in management capabilities following Min Hee-Jin’s exit, the absence of a new producer and the departure of several key staff members who had worked closely with the former CEO.

Her legal team reportedly asked, “Is it meaningful to conduct an accounting appraisal while ignoring all these preconditions, such as producing and the trust relationship?” ADOR disagreed with that argument, maintaining that NewJeans’ popularity was driven primarily by the members themselves rather than a single producer. The agency reportedly argued that the group could have continued its activities successfully even after Min Hee-Jin left the company, and that future revenue should therefore be assessed independently of her involvement.

“In a way, just because Min Hee-Jin is involved, doesn’t mean things will always go well. There have also been cases where they didn’t,” the expert reportedly said, adding that comparable industry data could also be used to better evaluate her actual impact. The expert’s eventual report is expected to become a key piece of evidence as the court determines whether ADOR suffered financial damages and how those losses should be calculated.

During the hearing, the judge acknowledged that estimating damages in this case would be particularly challenging. The court reportedly observed that “the difficulty of this appraisal appears higher than in other cases,” noting that the final outcome could vary significantly depending on the assumptions used during the valuation process.

Another important issue raised was whether ADOR’s claimed financial losses should be calculated based solely on Danielle’s individual activities or on NewJeans’ group promotions as a whole.

The next hearings in the damages lawsuit are scheduled for September 10 and October 22, 2026.