Netizens claim NewJeans are legally terminating their contract with ADOR after reviewing the contract details

Netizens are closely examining the terms of the contract between NewJeans and ADOR, sparking intense online discussions.

On an online forum, users analyzed a detailed thread on X that referenced specific clauses from the contract to determine whether NewJeans has the legal grounds to terminate their agreement with ADOR.

One user highlighted a clause stating, "if a third party infringes upon or disrupts E's entertainment activities, C is obligated to take necessary measures to eliminate such infringement or disruption."

In this context, 'C' refers to ADOR, while 'E' represents NewJeans.

These contractual details became public during Min Hee Jin's previous injunction. Beyond Article 5, Clause 4, where the above provision is found, the user also referenced Article 15, Clause 1, which asserts that "if C fails to fulfill this obligation, the members of E have the right to terminate the exclusive contract."

According to the user on X, NewJeans is "terminating the contract according to its terms," as ADOR's CEO, Kim Joo Young, "failed to address" a corrective request from NewJeans regarding ADOR's breach of contract. They added that "a certified letter was sent," and that "once the termination rights are exercised, the exclusive contract becomes null and void."

Regarding penalty fees, the focus shifts to Clause 2 of Article 15. However, the user argued that if ADOR claims a penalty fee, the company must first prove it has fulfilled its obligations as a management agency, as per Clause 1.

Concluding with a strong message of support for NewJeans, the user wrote: "For too long, artists have wasted time and money trying to suspend exclusive contracts against agencies that violated them. Why should artists suffer losses when the fault lies with the company?"

In the comments, netizens overwhelmingly expressed support for NewJeans, though a small number raised questions in an effort to maintain objectivity.

Reactions included:

"There's more than enough reason for termination."

"It matches what's stated in the contract."

"They're not fools—they must have thoroughly reviewed the contract and consulted with lawyers before acting."

"Wow, there's such a clear termination clause."

"I'm sure they sought full legal advice. I hope they win, ㅠㅠ."

"The fight will come down to whether or not there was interference with their activities, lol."

"They know what they’re doing. That male reporter mansplaining to NewJeans earlier today was ridiculous, lol."

"NewJeans, fighting! Cheering for you!"

"They couldn’t even follow through with the planned fan meeting or full album in Korea. NewJeans will win."

"Does ADOR’s interference even hold legal weight?"

"Failing to protect the artists is itself a failure in management, so the contract cannot continue."

"Minji's explanation makes sense."

"Looking at the contract, it’s clear they shouldn’t be paying penalties—they deserve compensation instead, lol."

"If the contract is followed, not only can NewJeans terminate the agreement, but they could also file a claim for damages against HYBE. I hope this gets resolved soon so they can return to normal activities."

"ADOR and HYBE should return the money they made from NewJeans during this time."

"Was that contract written back when Min Hee Jin was still the CEO?"

"I hope they also file for damages, seriously, lol."

"They're crafting their own narrative of strong, self-reliant women—exactly what people hoped for. Amazing, NewJeans!"

The issue has sparked discussions beyond the contract itself, with netizens viewing it as a broader conversation about corporate fairness and gender-related power dynamics.

What are your thoughts?

SEE ALSO: Min Hee Jin challenges court finding of “workplace bullying,” files objection