FIFTY FIFTY Accuses ATTRAKT Of Incompetence In Court — Label’s Lawyer Responds
FIFTY FIFTY members’ lawyer accused ATTRAKT of incompetence.
On July 5, FIFTY FIFTY’s lawsuit against ATTRAKT saw its first day in court. Neither FIFTY FIFTY nor ATTRAKT’s Jeon Hong Joon appeared in court, but their lawyers made their opening arguments.
FIFTY FIFTY stated that although they had signed with ATTRAKT, Star Crew Ent, a different entity entirely, signed a distribution deal with Interpark.
A normal contract would be between Interpark and ATTRAKT, but why didn’t they do that? ATTRAKT claims that they had spent ₩6.00 billion KRW (about $4.60 million USD) of the ₩9.00 billion KRW (about $6.91 million USD) they received from Interpark. We will ask them to prove that.
— FIFTY FIFTY’s lawyer
ATTRAKT, however, countered that the members had originally signed with Star Crew Ent but then re-signed with ATTRAKT after the founding of the company.
As for the cloudy accounting practices, ATTRAKT acknowledged that they provided documents late, but it was due to a mistake made by a third party.
We didn’t omit (documents) deliberately. It was a mistake made by an outside company.
— ATTRAKT’s lawyer
ATTRAKT’s lawyer then stated that they didn’t intend to feud with the members, instead placing the blame on an external party.
We think that the real problem isn’t with the members but with an external party controlling them from behind.
— ATTRAKT’s lawyer
FIFTY FIFTY then argued that the real issue was ATTRAKT’s competence, not an external party. ATTRAKT’s lawyers then countered back by revealing that the label had invested ₩8.00 billion KRW (about $6.14 million USD) into the group.
You keep talking about ATTRAKT’s incompetence, but they invested ₩8.00 billion KRW (about $6.14 million USD) into the group. The CEO invested his whole life’s savings, including his mother’s. Don’t you think labeling that kind of investment as incompetence is a mischaracterization?
— ATTRAKT’s lawyer
Meanwhile, the judge asked that both parties submit additional documents by July 19. The trial is expected to take at least three weeks before the judge makes their ruling. Read more from the first hearing in the link below.
