Court Urges Settlement as NewJeans Rejects Reconciliation Efforts

The court urged NewJeans to consider a settlement during the ongoing contract dispute. NewJeans declined, citing irreparable trust, while ADOR showed openness to settling after a court decision. Public reaction criticized NewJeans and expressed frustration over the continued legal focus.

Court Urges Settlement Between NewJeans and ADOR

The Seoul Central District Court, currently overseeing the exclusive contract dispute between NewJeans and ADOR, encouraged both parties to consider settling the matter. During the second hearing of the main civil suit, Judge Jeong Hoe-il expressed disappointment that NewJeans had previously rejected any possibility of reconciliation and gently urged them to reconsider. Before concluding the session and setting a future date, he directly asked whether there was still any intention to reach an agreement, showing that the court hoped to avoid a drawn-out legal battle.

NewJeans Maintains Refusal Despite Court Suggestion

NewJeans’s legal team maintained a firm stance, stating that the relationship of trust had already broken beyond repair and they had crossed a river they could not return from. While they added they might need to discuss the suggestion again with their clients, they made it clear that a settlement would be extremely difficult. Just as they had done during the first hearing, they showed no serious willingness to compromise or explore reconciliation, reinforcing their belief that moving forward with the lawsuit was their only option.

ADOR Requests Swift Court Decision to Encourage Agreement

In contrast, ADOR emphasized that a swift ruling by the court could actually promote a smoother path to settlement. They explained that whether through a final judgment or through the outcome of the injunction, a clear decision from the court would help both sides find clarity and reach agreement more easily. ADOR expressed a strong preference for resolving the matter promptly under the court’s guidance and appeared open to constructive outcomes if the court could act decisively.

Online Users Analyze Court Signals in NewJeans Dispute

Once news of the court session reached the online community MLBPARK, users began analyzing the possible meaning behind the judge’s remarks. A widely shared interpretation suggested that the judge was subtly indicating that NewJeans might lose the case, and was encouraging them to think carefully before it was too late. According to many posts, the judge didn’t want to hand down a ruling that could severely damage the members’ futures, and instead hoped the parties could reach a more graceful resolution.

Public Disappointed by NewJeans Response to Court Efforts

The majority of online responses supported this interpretation and expressed disappointment in NewJeans for not picking up on the signals from the court. Many commenters felt that when a judge speaks that clearly, NewJeans should have recognized the implication and shown more openness to settlement. The tone of most comments suggested frustration that the group seemed overly confident and unwilling to reconsider, especially given that the members had only recently become adults and the judge appeared to be offering them a final opportunity for resolution.

Debate Grows Over Whether Court Should Remain Neutral

However, not everyone agreed with the judge’s approach, and a number of commenters argued that the court should have maintained strict neutrality. They said the judge’s only responsibility was to deliver a fair verdict, not to encourage reconciliation out of sympathy. These individuals felt that the age or gender of the members should not influence the court’s attitude and criticized what they perceived as an overly compassionate tone. Some users even mocked NewJeans for rejecting what they saw as their last chance, suggesting that their unwillingness to compromise would backfire.

Criticism Mounts Toward NewJeans Parents and Legal Advisors

Criticism also extended to NewJeans’s parents and legal representatives. Many people argued that the parents, being adults who should understand basic reasoning and social norms, should have guided the members more wisely and persuaded them to consider a settlement. Others claimed that the lawyers representing NewJeans had a professional duty to urge their clients toward compromise when the legal risks were high. They also stressed that the legal team should have clearly informed NewJeans that emotional appeals have no place in the courtroom, and that pleading for sympathy would not sway the court’s judgment.

Fans Want Music from NewJeans, Not More Court News

Among the many online reactions, one particular comment resonated with fans the most: a simple plea to hear music from NewJeans instead of seeing them in court-related headlines. The comment expressed a longing to see the group on music programs again, performing songs rather than being embroiled in legal disputes. This sentiment appeared to reflect the true feelings of many fans, who wish to support NewJeans as musicians and entertainers, not as subjects of ongoing legal controversies.

NewJeans and Legal Dispute Over Contractual Injunction

NewJeans and ADOR are engaged in a prolonged legal dispute over an injunction restricting independent activities. The court initially sided with ADOR, but NewJeans contested the decision, leading to an upcoming hearing.

Here’s a link to MLBPARK.

Thank you so much for reading this post! I’d love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to share them in the comments!