Min Hee-jin’s name echoes in court halls, KakaoTalk secrets break down the walls, Justice awaits where hidden truth calls.Source: TV Daily
The bitter civil battle between former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin and Source Music – a subsidiary of Hybe – has taken a dramatic turn. On 22 August 2025, the 12th Civil Affairs Department of the Seoul Central District Court held the third hearing of Source Music’s ₩500 million (≈US$360,000) damages lawsuit against Min. The court ruled that KakaoTalk logs obtained from Min’s account can be admitted as evidence, a key decision that Source Music believes will accelerate the proceedings.
Min’s legal team had insisted that the logs were illegally collected, stressing that private messages between Min and her colleagues were never meant for public disclosure. Source Music’s lawyers countered that Min had herself read private KakaoTalk exchanges during her April 2024 press conference and that her team could not demand secrecy only for logs that portrayed her in a negative light.
Judge Kim (presiding over the civil division) sided with Source Music on the admissibility question. He noted that a password for the chat data was provided by “a person in charge”, so the court could not view the messages as illegally collected under Korea’s privacy laws. While the logs will be used as evidence, the court refused to allow Source Music to show them in a public presentation, reasoning that open display during trial might infringe communication secrecy; instead, their contents can be discussed during oral arguments. The next hearing is scheduled for 7 November 2025.
Why the Logs Matter
The civil suit traces back to Min Hee-jin’s highly public feud with Hybe. In July 2024, Source Music sued Min, claiming that her public criticisms about the launch of NewJeans and alleged similarities with LE SSERAFIM caused reputational and financial harm. At the second hearing on 30 May 2025, Min’s team tried to suppress a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation that relied on KakaoTalk logs, arguing that the messages were illegally obtained and violated confidentiality. The court initially expressed concern, noting that evidence violating secrecy might be inadmissible, but also acknowledged that it could not completely block Source Music’s claims.
Hybe/Source Music argued that the logs were not “newly revealed” and that there is no Supreme Court precedent banning such evidence in civil cases. They said the data were collected with prior consent and differed from evidence secretly taken from a phone. These arguments foreshadowed the eventual decision in August.
Legal experts have long debated the case’s implications for Korea’s Communication Secret Protection Act. In a 2024 interview, lawyer Noh Jong-eon suggested that Hybe’s use of Min’s KakaoTalk conversations without her explicit consent could violate constitutional protections for privacy. He argued that releasing her private conversations to the media constitutes a serious illegal act and a breach of contract. Another legal expert cited by KbizoOm warned that such disclosure may even attract criminal penalties under the Communication Secret Protection Act and the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization.
Despite these concerns, the August ruling indicates that the court believes the chats were obtained lawfully, at least for civil purposes. It does not resolve the broader debate about how far companies can go in monitoring employees’ private communications, but it underscores that consent (even indirect consent via a person in charge) is pivotal. The decision is likely to influence future cases involving electronic communications and workplace privacy in South Korea.
Public Reaction and What’s Next
The latest ruling has ignited a wave of reactions from fans, critics and casual observers.
On X (formerly Twitter), user Sniper22 (@Snper22) summarised the hearing: “Sejong [Min Se-jong, ADOR vice-president and co-defendant] pleaded with the judge not to disclose the content of the KakaoTalk messages. Sejong requested that their contents not even be read aloud. It seems the material must be something damaging.”
Netizens reacted with mixed tones — some cynical, others suspicious, and a few still hoping justice will prevail.
“Why are they pleading with the judge not to disclose KakaoTalk messages?? MHJ was bold when she disclosed the chat between her and BSH… now what happens?? Afraid of being dragged down by her loyal fan aka Bunnies??”
“Min Hee-jin is talking about politics”
“Because that was edited and selectively shown in her favor. Just like the documents at the NA, all intentional setup to cause damage.”
“The content will reveal the true colors of MH and NJ to the public. That’s going to ruin the narrative they’ve built all this time…”
“I’ll be giddy as fuck once it’s released. I think more will be exposed once everyone who works with her knows she’s screwed. More to come, baby!”
“I hope justice can be served.”
In Korean online forums, sympathy toward Min remains strong. A viral post on theqoo—quoted by news outlet Allkpop—stated that Min is being scrutinized “harder than a presidential candidate,” pointing out that even politicians do not have three years of KakaoTalk messages excavated and that such scrutiny suggests she has run her company clean.
Other netizens defended her, saying, “Their actions are so disgusting … expose your KakaoTalk messages too then,”
“This just highlights how HYBE is a loser,”
“I pity Min Hee-jin.”
Meanwhile, critics on K-pop forums and TikTok accuse Min of hypocrisy. Many remember her 2024 press conference where she showcased KakaoTalk messages to criticize Hybe. For these detractors, Min’s current plea for privacy appears opportunistic.
The discourse also touches on South Korea’s intense idol-industry politics. Fans worry about the impact on NewJeans, who have publicly supported Min but remain under Hybe’s umbrella. Others note that the dispute distracts from more serious issues in the industry, such as alleged workplace harassment, mismanagement and the pressure placed on young idols. A KbizoOm piece warned that making private conversations public could encourage “private surveillance and civilian monitoring,” signalling that the case has implications beyond K-pop.
The August decision doesn’t end the legal drama, but it solidifies Source Music’s strategy. With the KakaoTalk logs now admitted, the company will likely present them to demonstrate that Min orchestrated a smear campaign and interfered with the debut of its girl group. Min’s team may still argue that the logs are taken out of context or that they do not prove damages. Whether the logs sway the court is uncertain; judges might view them as evidence of internal disagreements rather than actionable misconduct.
For now, the hearing set for November 7 2025 will be closely watched by fans and industry observers. The outcome could redefine the balance of power between entertainment giants like Hybe and the creative executives who helped them rise.
Sources: news.nate, Daum, Allkpop, Kbiizoom, Chosun
