Danielle and ADOR Clash Over NewJeans Activity Plans in Damages Case

Danielle and ADOR are disputing how NewJeans’ future activity plans should factor into the agency’s damages case against the former member.

The Seoul Central District Court held the fifth hearing in ADOR’s lawsuit against Danielle, a member of her family and former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin on September 10.

At the hearing, Danielle’s side argued that it is necessary to determine whether concrete plans for NewJeans activities actually existed. Her representatives argued that if activities could not proceed because of limitations on ADOR’s ability to produce them, that could affect the scope of damages attributed to Danielle.

ADOR pushed back, saying that NewJeans activity plans do exist while questioning whether it is legally required to disclose future planning materials to the opposing side.

The two sides also disagreed over access to materials used in an appraisal intended to help calculate damages.

ADOR argued that materials provided to the appraiser contain trade secrets and should not be disclosed in full. Danielle’s side maintained that reviewing the underlying materials is necessary to properly assess the appraisal’s conclusions.

The court proposed allowing sensitive portions to be redacted while permitting an accountant representing Danielle’s side to review the remaining material. It also asked ADOR to provide a more specific breakdown of the damages it is claiming.

The dispute is part of ADOR’s lawsuit seeking approximately ₩33.1 billion in damages from Danielle, a member of her family and Min. The amount was reduced earlier this year from an initial claim of approximately ₩43.1 billion.

The case followed the broader contract dispute between NewJeans and ADOR and the subsequent termination of Danielle’s exclusive contract with the agency.