New Jeans Agency Adore Faces Legal Battle with Production Firm Dolphin Kidnapping Over ‘ETA’ Director’s Cut
Table of Contents
A dispute over the release of New Jeans’ “ETA” director’s cut video has escalated into a significant legal battle between Adore, the agency behind the popular K-pop group New Jeans, and Dolphin Kidnapping, the production company responsible for the video. Dolphin Kidnapping has deposited 1.2 billion won (approximately $920,000 USD) with the seoul Central District Court to halt the enforcement of a 1 billion won (approximately $765,000 USD) judgment against them.
The case, stemming from a lawsuit filed by Adore, centers on allegations of unauthorized posting of the video. though, Dolphin Kidnapping asserts the release was authorized through a verbal agreement and is actively challenging the court’s initial ruling.
court Ruling and Initial Judgment
On Thursday, December 13th, the Seoul Central district Court’s Civil Settlement Division 63, presided over by Chief Judge Lee Gyu-young, partially sided with adore in the first trial. The court ordered Dolphin Kidnapping to pay 1 billion won in damages, plus annual interest of 12% dating back to December 14, 2024, until full repayment.Despite appealing the decision, Adore was granted provisional execution, allowing them to pursue the judgment while the appeal is pending. This prompted Dolphin Kidnapping to apply for a compulsory suspension of execution and subsequently post the 1.2 billion won deposit.
Dolphin Kidnapping disputes Claims,cites Oral Agreement
Just days after filing their appeal on December 20th,Dolphin Kidnapping released a detailed statement on their official social media channels,contesting what they described as “inaccurate facts” surrounding the initial court ruling. According to the company, the court itself acknowledged the existence of a valid oral agreement regarding the upload of the “ETA” director’s cut.
“Contrary to Adore’s claim, the court ruled that the act of uploading New Jeans’ ‘ETA’ Director’s Cut video…was pursuant to an oral agreement between the parties and therefore cannot be considered unauthorized posting,” a company release stated. they further emphasized that the court found the evidence supporting the oral agreement to be “credible and beyond doubt.”
Though, the court ultimately ruled against Dolphin Kidnapping due to the contract’s requirement for written consent. “Despite the oral agreement with the CEO of adore, we judged that our company was obligated to pay a penalty for breach of contract,” the company explained.
Dolphin Kidnapping also highlighted that the court dismissed Adore’s claims of copyright infringement and found director Shin Woo-seok’s public statements to be lawful.
Contradictory Ruling and Appeal
The production company expressed frustration with the court’s decision, arguing that penalizing them for adhering to a mutually agreed-upon oral agreement – intended to supersede the written contract – was “contradictory in itself and runs counter to the parties’ intention.”
“Our company appealed…believing that the decision of the first trial court not only went against the will of the parties to the agreement but also went against common sense,” the statement continued.
Financial Losses and contractual Integrity
Dolphin Kidnapping also revealed that the production of New Jeans’ music videos and related content had been undertaken at a financial loss,intended to bolster their portfolio and ensure high-quality work. They submitted financial records to the court to substantiate these claims.
The company firmly refuted rumors regarding their contract structure, asserting that they operate under “reasonable contracts” that guarantee a “self-reliant creative environment” and foster a “partnership of mutual respect.” They pledged to take “strong action” against the spread of “false facts and systematically manipulating comments.”
The legal battle underscores the complexities of navigating verbal agreements within the framework of formal contracts, especially in the fast-paced world of K-pop production. The outcome of the appeal will likely set a precedent for similar disputes in the industry.
