[FANACC] 101116 Review Of First Hearing On Tuesday November 16th, 2010

Time and Date: Tuesday November 16th, 2010. 10:00 AM
Location: Seoul District Courts
Counsel: JYJ (Sejong), SM (YulChon / JiPyungJiSeong)

Content of Lawsuit:

▼JYJ’s new lawsuit begun after their objection to SM’s lawsuit

Before the review of the hearing

• I, who wrote this review of the hearing, am a fan of JYJ. I have written this review in the perspective of a JYJ fan.
• Everything that has occurred between JYJ and SM is because of an unlawful 13-year contract, SM’s unfair exploitation of their authority by putting all responsibility of compensation on JYJ if the contract is terminated, and an unfair income distribution.
• Bringing in Crebeau Cosmetics as the main reason for the lawsuit is nothing more than one of SM’s dirty tricks.
• I originally had no plans of writing a review. I have always believed in and respected the decisions made by the members of JYJ. However, the reason I have decided to change my mind is because I believe this is the least I can do against the unprincipled actions of those who control the media with their lies and falsities.
• This review can only be re-posted in sites that support and believe in JYJ.

1. SM’s Stance
※SM was unable to submit a portion of their evidence during the hearing. Though they complete all evidence submission beforehand, they had to resubmit a portion of their documents due to a change in the number code on the documents. If evidence is submitted the day before the hearing, it is impossible for it to be delivered to the presiding judge on the day of the hearing. Therefore, some of the points SM makes are points with content, but no evidence.

(1) Background of the Case

• The problem arose when JYJ submitted their injunction and left TVXQ in July, 2009. This was when SM’s years of efforts began to return in the form of profit.
• Before May, 2009, JYJ never raised an issue regarding the contract to SM.
• SM was the one who approached JYJ first in February, 2009 to better income distribution for JYJ’s profit from domestic and overseas activities. JYJ agreed to all the points presented at the time.
• JYJ has never raised an issue regarding the contract other than those pertaining to income, and none of the other artistes of SM have raised a complaint regarding the current contract.
• Therefore, the root of the problem is JYJ’s cosmetic company.

(2) The Progress of the Case

• Problems between SM and JYJ began in May, 2009.
  • At the time, JYJ was participating in the Tohoshinki Concert Tour (4TH The Secret Code) in Japan. During this time, SM received a request from AVEX. The content of the request is as so:
  • A great amount of reports were sent to AVEX by Japanese fans that stated, ‘It is being said that if Crebeau cosmetics are bought, you will get a chance to meet TVXQ. Also, the parents of TVXQ members are selling Crebeau cosmetics in the regions where the Japanese Tour is being held.’ AVEX sent a request to SM to verify these reports.
  • SM met with JYJ, and set forth to verify the validity of the reports.
  • JYJ were told by SM that a problem would arise if the members exploited the name of TVXQ instead of treating the cosmetic company as a mere financial investment. In order to confirm that there were no legal issues, SM asked JYJ to reveal the details of their investments, but JYJ did not do so. A deposition has been submitted as evidence.
• JYJ turned down a commercial with a domestic cosmetics brand (Speculated as MISSHA), and filed an injunction against SM.

(3) Crebeau and JYJ have a close relation with each other

• January 8th, 2009. JYJ attended the investment briefing session that was held in China.
  • At said investment briefing session, people advised JYJ to invest.
  • Fans recorded the event, and this video evidence has been submitted in the form of a CD.
• JYJ were the CEOs of Crebeau.
• JYJ advertised to fans that they were involved with Crebeau.

(4) JYJ filed an injunction against SM because of the cosmetics company.

• JYJ attempted to exploit the fame of TVXQ to develop an unknown cosmetics brand into one known widely across Asia, and to be rewarded greatly through their investments. JYJ decided that they could not partake in the cosmetic company’s business if they continued to stay under their exclusive contract with SM. Therefore, they filed an injunction, stating the unlawfulness of the exclusive contract as a reason, in order to partake in the cosmetics company.
• If the cosmetics company wasn’t the reason why JYJ filed the injunction, then why did JYJ not have any objections against the contract until after their involvement in the cosmetics industry began?

(5) Even after the injunction was filed, SM continually tried to change the clauses of the exclusive contract with JYJ. However, JYJ did not accept these changes.

(6) Problems regarding the length of the contract period

• Both sides agreed to the length of the contract period for financial motives.
• SM has not held back in giving JYJ as much support as possible during the contract period.
• JYJ must carry out what they have agreed to in their contract.
• A long-term contract is essential for stable overseas activities. When BoA and SES entered the Japanese market, BoA succeeded but SES failed. SES failed because they did not have a long-term contract. Therefore, even AVEX asked TVXQ for a long-term contract.
• Also, a long-term contract is essential to overcome the consuming limits of idol stars and develop into artistes. If a contract period is set for 3 or 4 years, the agency can’t help but work to maximize profit in a short period of time. Therefore, a contract period of 10 years or more is necessary so that the artiste can raise his value and work in a larger market.
• SM is currently supporting trainees with ten years of know-how under their belt. In order to construct and run the system, billions of Won are needed as the annual budget. SM is the only agency with such a system.
• SM receive consent from JYJ’s parents.
• SM has followed the rules of the Fair Trade Commission.

(7) Problems regarding income distribution

• The income distribution system is actually in JYJ’s favor.
• Compared to the income distribution clauses of other agencies, JYJ is receiving the best treatment that can be found in the industry.
• SM has given JYJ more money than what is agreed upon for income distribution for album sales.
• There are many instances where SM covered expenses that JYJ were supposed to pay for.
• As SM is a listed company, it has released all contents of its financial affairs and no problems that have found.
• Despite this, JYJ stated that is was a problem with the income distribution, and SM actively worked to collect all data regarding the accounts. Though SM gave JYJ permission to view and verify the accounts, JYJ did not do so.
• Also, JYJ has never raised an issue to SM regarding income distribution and their tax adjustments until the filed their injunction.

(8) Problems regarding JYJ’s supposed deprivation of freedom

• There has not been a single instance in which SM deprived JYJ of their freedom.
• This can be accounted for by staff members who have worked with JYJ.

(9) The immense damages the 2 members of TVXQ (Yunho, Changmin) have incurred because of JYJ

• JYJ turned down a commercial contract for TVXQ with a domestic cosmetics brand that had a down payment of 450 million Won.
• One third of TVXQ’s Asia Tour (4TH MIROTIC ASIA TOUR) was not carried out. The evidence for this is the cancellation of the Shenzhen concert.
• Until the end of the year in 2009, JYJ participated in activities of their choice, and ignored the opinions of the 2 members of TVXQ.
• Though JYJ made it seem like they were working to carry out activities as TVXQ on the outside, this is not true.
• JYJ interfered with the Japanese activities of the 2 members of TVXQ by requesting that AVEX end their business relationship with SM and sign a contract with CJES.

JYJ’s stance

(1) In the contract between SM and JYJ, there are many unfair and unlawful clauses.

• 13-year long-term contract
• Exploitation of authority regarding compensation of damages
• Unfair income distribution
• The point of this lawsuit is to make the entire contract with such clauses completely invalid.

(2) There have been previous instances of an unlawful contract between an agency and a celebrity.

(3) Even if the contract is not nullified, JYJ cannot be charged for non-fulfillment of their obligations. They have always carried out the schedules give to them.

(4) Crebeau is nothing more than an investment.

• There exists no clause in the contract that prohibits the celebrity from investing in other businesses.
• There has never been an instance where JYJ’s activities were hindered by their investment in Crebeau.

3. Question and Answer Session with the Judge

(1) Income Distribution
Judge: Did SM give JYJ more money and conditions better than those originally stated in the contract?
SM: Yes. In reality, SM distributed the income to JYJ more favorably than what the contract states.
Judge: Doesn’t that imply that SM has acknowledged that the clause in the contract is unfit to be carried out?
SM: That is not so. Compared to the clauses of other agencies, SM provided JYJ with the best possible income distribution percentages. There were instances where SM covered expenses that JYJ were supposed to pay. However, this does mean that SM’s clause is unreasonable.
Judge: We have to know the exact details of such adjustments. But right now, SM is stating that ‘Though we had nothing more to give, we gave them more than we intended to.’
SM: Though the contract was created on the basis of an ordinary celebrity, it can be changed to fit the unique aspects of each celebrity. We are not saying that we gave them more money because the contract was unfair.
Judge: Are you not saying that according to your account adjustments, you ‘Gave them more when there was no more to give’? Is it not normal for there to be no money left over to give to JYJ after all the money has been distributed?
SM: That is not so.
Judge: So are you saying that there is money that is left over?
SM: Yes.
(T/N: What the judge is trying to ask is, if SM is paying for all these extra expenses and such, which add up to quite an enormous amount which doesn’t give room for profit to be left over, should they have any profit left to give JYJ extra money? The money doesn’t add up if SM was really able to pay for all these expenses while paying JYJ more than what they should have been given.)

(2) TVXQ’s activities
Judge: Are the two members performing activities as TVXQ?
SM: In reality, they have not been able to do so.
Judge: Didn’t the 2 members participate in overseas activities as TVXQ? (T/N: He’s referring to the SM Town Live ’10 performances)
SM: That was their first official activity as TVXQ since this case began.
Judge: Have the three members moved to a new agency?
JYJ: No.
SM: This is contrary to what we now. CJES is currently supporting JYJ’s activities. This is a fact widely known and accepted in the industry.

(3) Applying for witnesses
Judge: Are there any witnesses for this hearing?
SM:

• SM employee Kang Jung Ah : Witness to testify that the exclusive contract is not unlawful
  *Kang Jung Ah is a staff member who was there when the contract was signed between JYJ and SM
• Head of SM’s Finance Team Yoon Sung Hee : Witness to testify that the income distribution is fair

JYJ: SM employee Kang Jung Ah is unfit to be a witness. At the time when the contract was signed, JYJ were minors. We are asking for the contract to be nullified because the content of the contract is unlawful, not because the contract wasn’t signed to begin with.
SM: It is important to know what the atmosphere and situation was like, and what was explained to JYJ when the contract was signed.
Judge: A interrogation of witnesses is necessary to judge the general content of the case. Therefore, Kang Jung Ah and Yoon Sung Hee will be noted down as witnesses. Are there any other witnesses?
SM: SM Japan Director Nam So Young
Judge: How are Crebeau and Japan related?
SM: The problem regarding Crebeau was first brought up in Japan. Japanese fans reported that JYJ were promoting Crebeau cosmetics during their Japanese tour.

• SM Japan Director Nam So Young : Witness to testify that cosmetics were sold during the Japanese tour

Judge: Has SM not already submitted evidence regarding that problem? I happen to know that SM has even had media coverage done on the issue. And even if Director Nam So Young testifies, she is not the person who can present exact information regarding the content of JYJ’s investment in Crebeau.
SM: AVEX representative (not chosen yet) : Witness to testify the importance of a long-term contract

• The witness will testify that when AVEX and SM first signed the contract together, it was decided that a 13-year contract was necessary.
• The witness will testify what JYJ did after the injunction to sever the ties between AVEX and SM.

JYJ: Why is SM trying to talk about what happened after the injunction?
SM: The reason SM is talking about what happened after the injunction is because CJES attempted to sever the ties between SM and AVEX and inflict financial losses.
JYJ: The case that SM has presented wishes to verify the validity of the contract and charge JYJ for non-fulfillment of their obligations. SM also calls for compensation of losses from JYJ regarding this.

• Then what exactly did JYJ do to SM to justify this charge of non-fulfillment of their obligations? Please be specific.
• The problem will be difficult to assess if SM states that everything JYJ did was a problem.
• Fans have been showing much attention to this case and JYJ. The fans’ attention is a great asset to JYJ. SM is doing nothing but purely attacking and criticizing JYJ in an open court. That will benefit neither side.

SM: We admit that SM hasn’t been able to explain in detail JYJ’s non-fulfillment of their obligations. The reason SM needs AVEX’s testimony is because it is proof that a 13-year contract is valid and necessary in the current Japanese music market.
Judge: Kang Jung Ah and Yoon Sung Hee will be noted down as witnesses. Will JYJ be calling in any witnesses?
JYJ: No.

(T/N: I’m not sure where (4) went but I can’t find it anywhere. The author of this review may have omitted it and forgotten to change the numbers or it may not have been added when being moved from the original site)

(5) The formal objection filed by SM to the verdict of the injunction
JYJ:

• After the verdict was made on the injunction, JYJ was planning on filing a lawsuit requesting the nullification of their contract with SM.
• However, as JYJ are celebrities, their activities come before their disputes. Therefore, they chose to partake in activities in the entertainment industry before filing the nullification lawsuit.
• That is when SM filed a lawsuit to verify the continued validity of the contract between SM and JYJ.
• As SM filed a lawsuit verifying the continued validity of the contract before JYJ filed their lawsuit nullifying the contract between SM and JYJ, we did not file a lawsuit pertaining to this issue. As two lawsuits may have ensued with repeated content.
• JYJ requested materials pertaining to their activities from SM. However, there are documents that JYJ have not received.
• SM states that JYJ did not come to retrieve the documents themselves, but that is not true. SM manages all its celebrities together. Therefore, there is no separate section where the TVXQ-related documents are located. SM basically told us that everything’s in their office, so we must find all the information ourselves. However, this is an issue that requires the hiring of an accountant to solve and is very costly. That is why we wish for SM to sort through and hand over the files.
• We have done an investigation into whether the income was distributed correctly according to the files given to JYJ by SM. There were additional files that we required from SM. However, the date of the lawsuit was changed. And SM filed a formal objection to the verdict of the injunction. Even though JYJ and Baek Chang Joo have not signed an exclusive contract, SM began a dispute solely based on their belief that an exclusive contract does exist between the two parties. Due to all these happening, which complicated matters, JYJ have not been able to carry out their investigation calmly.
• The verdict of the injunction nullified this contract. However, SM continues to claim that the contract is still valid. As SM has great influence in the entertainment industry, JYJ is unable to actively perform under an independent name.
• JYJ released their 1st album, but SM filed an injunction against it. Then they canceled their injunction.

(6) Request during the hearing
JYJ:

• We ask that the Courts make a verdict on the validity of the contract as soon as possible due to the nature of JYJ’s careers as celebrities.
• Also, SM has stated that SM has give more money to JYJ than the contract dictates, but this is not true. Even just from looking at the documents we have received, this is not true.
• In fact, SM has actually given JYJ less money than the contract dictates. SM has to give JYJ 22.3 billion Won more. We feel further investigate this part and submit documents.

Judge: This has been noted.

(7) Request by SM’s lawyer for JYJ’s attendance in court
SM: We have never met JYJ till now. We request that JYJ make an appearance in court.
Judge: You want JYJ to appear in court? Are you stating that you wish to interrogate JYJ?
SM: We don’t need all three of them. We want to interrogate at least one of them. We have many questions for JYJ.
Judge: What are you going to interrogate them on?
SM:

• JYJ’s claim that they signed the contract under extremely poor conditions
• JYJ’s claim that SM deprived JYJ of their freedom
• JYJ’s claim that they have never heard anything about the process of their income distribution
• JYJ’s claim that the were under extremely bad conditions when they entered the Japanese market

We want to know if JYJ can look us in the eye and talk about these four claims in court.
JYJ: We do not know if this is reasonable. However, if SM wants this interrogation, we can try to convince JYJ to appear in court.
Judge: This matter will be discussed by the department of justice.

The reason JYJ’s stance is short and concise
The main issue here is the unlawful contract but SM’s lawyers have brought up the cosmetics company to change the subject of controversy and dull the judge’s judgment. JYJ’s lawyer concisely stated his main points so the judge didn’t have doubts or attacks on what was stated. SM’s lawyer kept trying to ruin JYJ’s reputation by touching upon this and that, and in the end, he was interrogated by the judge, which is why their conversations are longer^^ And in a trial, the giving and receiving of evidence and documents is most important. Because they lacked in that area, SM tried to turn the tide in their favor by saying provocative statements. -The JYJ 싹여사

Source: [The JYJ 싹여사+불법체류's egloos]
Translation credits: jeeelim5@tohosomnia.net
Shared by: tohosomnia.net
Do not remove/add on any credits

[TRANS] Message from the Cassiopeia who wrote the hearing account

Oh no, I checked my PMs a little late;; I'm sorry about that.

This trial was a public trial; ordinary citizens were allowed to watch so that's why I went.

I was... quite surprised to find out that there is interest for this trial overseas.
And if I could say one more thing, there are no lies in this account.
Why would I ever want to trick other fans?
I am a fan who loves TVXQ, and a person who is very interested in law, so that was why I went.
I hope you can tell them that...

Anyway, if you have any thing else you would like to ask, please send me a message ^^

T/N: This is the reply I received from the Cassiopeia who wrote this account when I sent her a message asking her whether the trial was an open public trial or not as some international fans were questioning why she was there in the first place.

Source: [My Daum Account]

Translation credits: jeeelim5@tohosomnia.net
Shared by: tohosomnia.net
Do not remove/add on any credits

[FAN] 100507 Account Of The Hearing

T/N: This is NOT me. I found this on Yuaerubi (in a section only open to upgraded members) and thought that you all should read it. Recently, my rights as a translator were questioned for deciding not the translate something so here I am leveling out the playing field. You know as much about this as kCassies do now. Things have been bolded for your convenience. DO NOT SHOOT THE MESSENGER. kthnxbai


Today was the hearing between sm and the three members...
First of all, my personal thoughts have been put into this so please take that into consideration as you read it. I should have written stuff down while I was there T_T...
I don't remember everything... but I will write everything I remember here.
When I went, there were a couple of reporters and... President Kim Young Min as well as some woman, and that woman kept sighing... like someone who was innocent and being unfairly treated... throughout the whole trial, especially when the three members' lawyer was talking...
(I know now that, that woman is the President of SM Japan)

I'll talk about what is being talked about between our stars (Cassiopeia) first. You have to know this.
I see a lot of our stars saying that the three members should agree to the conditions laid out today, but remember that SM was not the ones to put forth those conditions!!!

If you look through the articles about the conditions...
The idea came from the judge near the end of the hearing,
The judge gave SM's representative a very extreme example and asked him if SM would be willing to change the three members' contract if the terms of contract were a year long and if the contract was entirely different from the current one.
SM's representative told the judge to ask that to Kim Young Min,
Kim Young Min stood up (to me, he looked kind of hesitant) and said, "We would be willing to come to a settlement."
It felt like he was saying that they would be willing to consider but not that they would agree on a settlement for sure.
To this, the judge asked the three members' side the same question, and the lawyer talked as if he had no inclination to come to a settlement.
It did seem as though he was watching what he said as the three members weren't there, but he said that the three members didn't really want to come to a settlement..
So the judge asked if a settlement was impossible and the three members' lawyer said something about personal trust and that the relationship between the three members and SM had become too tight.

And overall... this was a bit.. iffy.. but personally, I thought SM's lawyer spoke very well. I almost felt as though I was being persuaded?
What he said sounded so credible... but he was a bit arrogant? He sat crooked in his chair, and I felt that the way he spoke was a little arrogant too.
Compared to him, the three members' lawyer was... so lacking that I wanted to speak instead of him.
The judge was kind of throwing questions at them in a kind of attacking way and was able to pick out all the flaws in the arguments.

And he said that two out of the three members had credit lines (*please see below) and asked SM how they were going to explain that.
+)The judge said to SM's side, "You said that two of the three members have credit lines, right?" SM tried to say, "No, one..." but the three members' lawyer cut in and said, "It's two."

And Crebeau wasn't brought up that much.

SM's side stated that SM balances accounts biannually. The three members' side stated that this all happened partially due to the fact that the members' wages for the first half of 2009 weren't right, so SM had told them to come check for themselves.
The information for concerts and activities aren't sorted into TVXQ, Super Junior, SNSD, etc, but it comes all together in the groups of 200X, month X, day X so SM said all the information they had could store a container truck.
They said that was why they did not submit the documents to the Courts, and they told the three members to come check for themselves, but a representative of the three members came instead. So the judge asked SM why the three members had to come, and why the representative simply couldn't have been given the files to give to the three members. SM's representative stated that the members themselves would know best of what they performed in so they should personally come...
Anyway, they still haven't been able to properly check this as there wasn't an answer.
(Sorry... I don't remember a lot of this part...)

Also, the three members' lawyer said that he received a copy of the accounts but the specifics of what came from where were not written on them.
For example, it said that TVXQ earned 3.4 billion Won from their first Asia tour concerts that had a total of 14 performances but in their second Asia tour, that had a similar number of audience members and a couple of extra performances, they earned 1.5 billion Won less (I don't remember if he said that it was 1.5 billion Won less, or that it was only 1.5 billion total).

Therefore, he said that he couldn't trust SM,
and for the Japanese activities, TVXQ earned over 99 billion Won but no money ever gets to them, and that their Japanese earning are split between AVEX and SM Japan, and then to SM and then to the members.

He was questioning where all that money went... (sorry;; my memory is....) and the judge asked him what his point was, and also asked if his point was that he can't trust in AVEX, and if the members can't trust in AVEX, why they renewed their contract with the agency.
The lawyer said that it wasn't that the three members didn't trust AVEX, it was that they couldn't trust what came after AVEX... something like that.

In conclusion, the judge said that neither side seemed to want to back down from their stance and that it would be hard to reach a settlement.
+)But the three members' side did say they would talk to the three members about it again.

If I could say one more thing, I think SM has a lot of evidence prepared for this lawsuit. Every time the representative opened his mouth, he would say that he would submit it all later........

When people were leaving after the hearing... I went out when Kim Young Min was leaving.... and I almost swore.... he was smiling as he was walking out and he had such a... confident expression on his face.... I personally thought the judge was leaning towards SM's side.. (that's a personal thought)
Anyway, the lawyer was very convincing... I would get so angry, I wanted to get up and speak for the three members instead.. they would say ridiculous things..... as I said, I'll add more when I remember it.

+++)
(Sorry for the continuous adding of new things... I keep remembering things..)
Near the end, when they were talking about a settlement, the judge asked for the three members to say something about it themselves,
but the three members' lawyer said that it hadn't been long since the three members were no longer minors and they might not be able to speak well in such a situation.
The SM lawyer sneered and said, "They aren't kids anymore, are they?".... His voice was dripping with mockery.. (from a personal standpoint)
Honestly, the three have never been to such an environment so it is true that they might not be able to speak well,
I think that was why the lawyer said such things.... um....

++)
And what the three members' side was emphasizing was performing activities as five.
That the three members really wanted to perform as five..

+)
They were told to submit all documents by late-May... that will probably be when the verdict is made..?
And what I've written here contain no lies, they're all things I saw and heard.
I hope that our stars believe in them and wait for them till the end.


T/N: Line of Credit - A line of credit is any credit source extended to a business by a bank or financial institution. A line of credit may take several forms such as cash credit, overdraft, demand loan, export packing credit, term loan, discounting or purchase of commercial bills etc. It is like an account that can readily be tapped into if the need arises or not touched at all and saved for emergencies. Interest is only paid on the money actually taken out. The concept has been introduced recently after the East Asian Crisis. The government can borrow money from international monetary institutions without having to handle the problem of an increasing foreign exchange reserves.

Lines of credit are often extended by banks and financial institutions to credit worthy customers to overcome liquidity problems (source: Wikipedia)

Source: [Yuaerubi]
Translation credits: jeeelim5@tohosomnia.net
Shared by: tohosomnia.net
Do not remove/add on any credits

[TRANS] 100507 TVXQ 3 Members Vs SM Hearing 'On Parallel Sides'

TVXQ 3 Members "The unfairness of the contract is grave" vs SM "The way we treat TVXQ is not bad compared to other agencies"

Three members of TVXQ (Xiah Junsu, YoungWoong Jaejoong, Micky Yoochun) and SM Entertainment had their first hearing today regarding an objection to the verdict on a contract suspension injunction that was made last year, and were unsuccessful in closing the gap between their conflicting stances.

The legal representatives of the three members of TVXQ and SM met at the Seoul District Courts at 5 p.m. on the 7th to state their stances on the lawsuit made by SM Entertainment regarding an objection to the contract suspension injunction verdict.

This hearing was held after SM filed for the lawsuit on April 12th as an objection to the partial acceptance verdict made by the Courts last year.

At the hearing, SM's representative stated, "Compared to other agencies in Korea, TVXQ's income division is not unfair," and emphasized that TVXQ's income division was not a pressing issue in the exclusive contract.

The representative also strongly questioned the three members' action of signing a separate contract with their Japanese agency AVEX although only the contract suspension injunction, not the actual lawsuit, had been partially accepted by the Courts.

On the other hand, the three members' representative stated, "The length and the income division section of the exclusive contract between SM and TVXQ is so unfair that the situation is very grave."

The judge in charge of the hearing (Judge Choi Sung Joon) questioned both sides of the possibility of a settlement, but no groundbreaking outcome came of it.

The Courts asked both sides whether a settlement could be made if the contract was fixed but received different answers.

When the Courts asked both sides if a settlement would be possible if the Courts shortened the length of the exclusive contract and if the income division was made more equal SM's representative said "Yes, a settlement would be possible," but the three members' side gave a skeptical answer and said, "The three members have lost their faith in SM and they think negatively of the prospect of working with the agency again."

However, the three members' side stated near the end of the hearing that, "If SM's desires for a settlement are sincere, then I will talk to the three members and will report back to the Courts."

On the other hand, Kim Young Min and Nam So Young attended the hearing as SM and SM Japan's representatives respectively but none of the members of TVXQ attended. The Courts will examine all files submitted by both sides till the end of this month and reach a verdict regarding SM's objection to the contract suspension injunction verdict.



Source: [spn edaily]
Translation credits: jeeelim5@tohosomnia.net
Shared by: tohosomnia.net

[TRANS] 100506 SM Vs TVXQ 3 Members' Lawsuit Begins, First Hearing On The 7th

The lawsuit between TVXQ members, YoungWoong Jaejoong, Micky Yoochun and Xiah Junsu, and SM Entertainment will begin on May 7th.

SM Entertainment took action against the three members of TVXQ and filed for an objection to the verdict on the contract suspension injunction as well as a verification of the continued existence of the exclusive contract. The first hearing for this lawsuit will be held at the Seoul District Courts on May 7th in the afternoon.

On this day, only the legal representatives of the two side will be attending the hearing. As this is a civil suit, the three members will not be participating in the trial.

The three members of TVXQ filed for a contract suspension injunction against SM Entertainment on July 31st, 2009 to the Seoul District Courts and were rewarded with a partial acceptance verdict on October 27th.

At the time, the Courts stated, "SM can no longer sign contracts regarding any TVXQ activities without notifying the members beforehand. SM must also not interfere with any individual activities the members of TVXQ wish to pursue."

Then, SM filed a lawsuit against the three members on April 12th, 2010 objecting the verdict to the contract suspension injunction and asking for a verification of the continued existence of the exclusive contract. SM also called for the three members to pay 2.2 billion Won in compensation.

SM's representative stated, "After the injunction, we have tried hard to continue TVXQ's existence so we have kept this lawsuit aside. However, as the three members did not give an official statement regarding future TVXQ activities and as TVXQ's Japanese activities were suspended, we have decided to go ahead with the lawsuit."


Source: [newsen+DNBN]
Translation credits: jeeelim5@tohosomnia.net
Shared by: tohosomnia.net