'Procedural Issue' is the key?Min Hee-jin vs Hive, actually 'Adore Management Rights' Game 2
Aug 28, 2024
|
Adore held a board meeting on the 27th and appointed Kim Joo-young, the inside director of Adore, as the new CEO" he said.
In other words, Min Hee-jin, the existing representative, will step down from the representative position, and Kim Joo-young will step up to the new head position. According to Odor, Min, who resigned as CEO, will remain as an in-house director and will also take charge of producing Newzins.
However, former representative Min's position is that the dismissal is sudden. Former CEO Min's legal representative, Sejong, was contacted by Sports Chosun on the 27th by surprise on the 24th that he was holding a board meeting due to the change of the CEO, and participated by telephone on the 27thThe decision was made regardless of the intention of former representative Min Hee-jin. (Dismissal of the CEO of Doror) itself is a violation of the contract between shareholders.
The fact that he will be in charge of producing Newzins as it is also "It has not been discussed in advance that he will continue producing Newzins." It was a one-sided notice."
In response, Audor said, `Today's Board of Directors of Audor was legally conducted in accordance with the procedures set by the Commercial Act and the articles of association, including notification of the agenda and the handling of the vote.' The schedule for the meeting was set among the dates that former CEO Min Hee-jin had hoped for a postponement. In attendance by video, Min countered, "The board has made the best choice for the future of Adore and Newzins after sufficient discussion.'
|
"Hive insists on terminating the inter-shareholder contract, but this has no basis, and CEO Min Hee-jin has admitted to terminating the inter-shareholder contract. Therefore, I clearly state that this decision to dismiss is a clear violation of the shareholder agreement and a disregard for the court's decision."
Regarding the fact that former CEO Min is stepping down as CEO, but maintains his position as an in-house director and continues to take charge of producing Newgene's, he stressed that it is based on data distributed by the Board of Directors, which is clearly false.
Then "CEO Min Hee-jin was dismissed against his will, not retired. And the board of directors only unilaterally notified that they would be in charge of producing.
Earlier, Hive attempted to change management due to former CEO Min's attempt to take over management rights, but the court cited the former CEO's request for an injunction to ban the exercise of voting rights.
Former representative Min's side was found to have no illegal reason claimed by Hive to CEO Min Hee-jin through the court's decision. Nevertheless, the board of directors, which is composed of a large number of Hive-appointed directors, decided to dismiss the CEO, and even distorted the fact that it misled the public as if it were not dismissed.'
Then "Once again, the decision to dismiss the CEO is a violation of the contract between shareholders and an illegal decision that ignores the court's decision."the sea that repeatedly emphasized "
He also said, `It is deceiving the public to play the media as if CEO Min Hee-jin said he would step down as CEO by his own will and only take charge of production.'
There are procedural problems with the board's decision as well"There was an amendment to the articles of incorporation to change the notification period for the convocation of the board of directors to one day at the extraordinary general shareholders' meeting resolved by the board of directors. It is strongly suspected that this is a preliminary measure not to allow time to respond with the dismissal of the CEO in mind."
Min and Hive have been at odds since April. Hive attempted to change the management on the grounds of former CEO Min's attempt to take over management rights, but retained his position as CEO after the court cited a request for an injunction against the exercise of voting rights on former CEO Min's dismissal agenda.
However, he is insisting that the replacement of the representative was one-sided, as former representative Min eventually resigned from the representative post in about four months. In response, the two sides seem to be arguing over whether there is a 'procedural problem' with the replacement of the representative of the door, arguing that the door was legally carried out. In fact, the key to the issue is 'Adore Management Rights', and attention is being paid to the future actions of Adore and its group, Newzins.
rightlight@sportschosun.com
