The court has suspended the enforcement of the payment for the put option by HYBE.
Min Hee-jin proposed to HYBE to resolve all ongoing legal disputes.
Following Min Hee-jin's victory in the put option lawsuit, HYBE has taken steps to prevent the enforcement of the ruling by depositing a sum in court.
As reported by News1 on the 25th, HYBE paid a court guarantee deposit of 29.25 billion won to the Seoul Central District Court. This action came after a ruling ordered HYBE to pay Min Hee-jin approximately 25.6 billion won in stock transaction fees.
After the Seoul Central District Court dismissed a lawsuit against Min Hee-jin and another shareholder regarding the confirmation of the termination of the shareholders' agreement on the 12th, HYBE filed an appeal and a request for a stay of enforcement on the 19th. The court granted HYBE’s request to suspend the payment enforcement of the put option until the appellate ruling. This conflict between Min Hee-jin and HYBE began in earnest in 2024 over allegations of management rights theft and subsequent disputes regarding the termination of the shareholders' agreement and the notification of exercising the put option. Min Hee-jin recently held a press conference proposing to HYBE to end all ongoing disputes, stating that she would not accept the put option payment.
This incident illustrates that the conflict between HYBE and Min Hee-jin transcends mere legal elements and raises ongoing debates about corporate governance and shareholder rights. Min Hee-jin's victory in the put option lawsuit could serve as a pivotal moment, highlighting how shareholder rights should be exercised beyond personal interests.
By depositing a substantial amount of 29.25 billion won, HYBE shows it is under pressure regarding financial management and operational flexibility. Such a situation can significantly affect the company's image and may lead to crucial changes in the trust of shareholders and consumers alike.
If Min Hee-jin's proposal to halt ongoing litigations is accepted, it would not only resolve disputes between the two parties but also provide an opportunity to re-examine how shareholder rights and corporate responsibilities should coexist in the broader context of the South Korean entertainment industry.
This article is KOSTAR’s reinterpretation of a story originally reported by TVDaily.
Photo: DB
