Former NewJeans member Danielle has publicly pushed back on one of the biggest accusations in her ongoing legal war with ADOR, directly denying that she ever signed a secret “dual contract” with another company. Her legal team says the explosive reports twisting her into a rule-breaking idol are simply wrong.
The new statement drops just days after ADOR used the alleged deal as key evidence in court, telling a Seoul judge that Danielle and NewJeans secretly tied themselves to a Chinese backed company linked to ComplexCon Hong Kong. With millions of dollars and Danielle’s post NewJeans future on the line, her side is now trying to reset the narrative around the AAO controversy.
What ADOR Accused Danielle Of Doing
At a July 2 hearing at the Seoul Central District Court, ADOR’s lawyers unveiled an “Exclusivity Agreement” involving NewJeans and AAO, a Cayman registered firm backed by Chinese capital. They argued this amounted to a forbidden second exclusive deal, signed after the group’s ComplexCon Hong Kong performance.
ADOR framed the document as proof of a dual contract, and singled Danielle out as the member who allegedly concealed it the longest. Korean and regional outlets quickly echoed the language of a “double contract with a Chinese company,” sparking intense backlash toward her online.
In K pop, a dual contract usually means an idol signs another exclusive entertainment agreement while still bound to their original agency, something companies treat as a serious breach that can trigger massive penalties. That is why the phrase “dual contract” around NewJeans Danielle hit so hard in headlines and fandom spaces.
Hwawoo Statement: ‘No Dual Exclusive Entertainment Contract’
On July 6, Danielle’s representatives at Hwawoo Law Firm released a detailed rebuttal, first circulated through NewJeans fan union accounts on X, including NJZ Base. The firm said some outlets had distorted what was revealed in court by highlighting Chinese capital and implying Danielle secretly signed or hid a second deal.
Hwawoo insists the situation actually grew out of a third party proposal in 2025 to purchase ADOR shares from HYBE, which was then mixed with false information. The statement flatly declares, “Danielle, along with the other NewJeans members, has not entered into, nor attempted to enter into, dual exclusive entertainment contracts with any specific company.”
- The firm says ADOR’s claims differ from objective facts or exaggerate them.
- It suggests ADOR may have influenced how those claims spread in the media.
- It argues group level issues were unfairly framed as Danielle’s solo wrongdoing.
Hwawoo also signaled it will ask the court to respond to attempts to sway the trial through media play. That ties into Korean reports that the presiding judge recently warned both ADOR and Danielle’s side not to “consciously cater to reporters,” underscoring how public opinion has become another battleground.
What This Twist Means For The HYBE ADOR Battle
The “no dual contract” line lands inside a much longer fight between HYBE, ADOR, former CEO Min Hee jin, and NewJeans. Courts have already ruled that the group’s original contracts with ADOR run through 2029, after which ADOR terminated only Danielle’s deal in December 2025 and sued her, a family member, and Min for tens of billions of won.
Regulators in Korea are now probing HYBE and ADOR after a complaint from Danielle’s side about harsh contract penalties, while upcoming hearings will have to decide what the AAO document actually is: a banned dual entertainment contract, as ADOR claims, or part of a share purchase proposal, as Hwawoo argues. However the court rules, fans know the outcome could reshape both Danielle’s career options and how K pop agencies handle idols who push back.