Danielle’s side challenges ADOR “Who would sign an artist facing nearly 100 billion KRW (about 72 million USD) penalty?”

11 Jun 2026, 09:05 by Demian09 · allkpop

Dispute escalates in ongoing legal battle over contract breach allegations and career restrictions

The legal conflict between ADOR and former NewJeans member Danielle has intensified once again, with both sides sharply disagreeing over whether the artist is effectively able to continue entertainment activities amid a massive damages lawsuit.

On June 11, the second hearing of the civil case was held at the Seoul Central District Court’s Civil Division 31, presided over by Judge Nam In Soo.

ADOR has filed a damages lawsuit against Danielle, her family, and former CEO Min Hee Jin, citing alleged violations of an exclusive contract. The company initially claimed approximately 43.1 billion KRW (about 31.9 million USD), later revising the claim downward to 33.09 billion KRW (about 24.5 million USD).

During the hearing, ADOR reiterated its position that there is no legal restriction preventing Danielle from continuing her entertainment career. The company argued that the lawsuit itself does not prohibit her from working, stating that there is no intention or legal basis to block her activities, and questioned why such claims were being made. ADOR further maintained that it is seeking compensation for alleged breach of contract and related damages arising from the violation of exclusive agreement obligations.

In response, Danielle’s legal representatives argued that while ADOR claims she is free to work, the reality is significantly different. They pointed to the scale of the dispute, stating that the penalty clause at the center of the case is approaching 100 billion KRW (about 72 million USD).

They argued that it is unrealistic for any entertainment agency to sign or support an artist facing such a massive financial liability, effectively making external career opportunities impossible. “This amounts to a de facto blockade of any entertainment activities,” Danielle’s side stated, adding that ADOR’s assertion that she is free to work is “deeply irresponsible” given the legal and financial pressure involved.

They further accused ADOR of prolonging the dispute through procedural requests and litigation tactics, including evidence submissions that delay proceedings. According to Danielle’s side, the extended duration of the lawsuit is severely damaging trust and further eroding the contractual relationship between the parties.

The court is expected to continue reviewing arguments as the high-stakes dispute over contract validity, damages, and career restrictions proceeds.

Share this article SHARE