Australian singer Danielle Marsh, a member of the Korean pop (K-pop) group NewJeans, is facing a lawsuit exceeding $44 million from a South Korean record company owned by the K-pop giant that produces BTS.Marsh, 20, was born in NSW to an Australian father and a South Korean mother. She rose to global prominence in 2022 following the debut of NewJeans, a five-member group whose members were aged between 14 and 18 at the time.NewJeans was created and produced by ADOR, a subsidiary of HYBE Entertainment. HYBE, one of the world’s largest K-pop companies, is estimated to have recorded cumulative revenue of approximately $2.075 billion up to the third quarter of 2025.In 2023, five NewJeans songs topped the Billboard Hot 100 chart, cementing the group’s rapid rise globally.Last year, ADOR filed a lawsuit against NewJeans after the group accused the label of “mistreatment” and announced plans to leave the agency.
In October, a South Korean court found no grounds for termination and ruled the group must continue under their contract with ADOR until 2029.
Following the ruling, South Korean media reported all five members were expected to return to the agency. However, an announcement from ADOR on Monday has shocked K-pop fans worldwide.In a statement, ADOR said that while it had been engaging with the remaining four members — including another Australian member, Hanni Pham — the agency had decided to terminate its contracts with Marsh.The company said it also intended to “pursue legal accountability against one member of Danielle’s family” as well as ADOR’s former CEO, Min Hee-Jin, who the BBC described as the “mentor” of the group.
The agency said Marsh’s family member and Min “bear significant responsibility for causing this dispute and for the delays in NewJeans’ departure and return”.
South Korean news outlet The Chosun Daily reported on Monday that ADOR had filed a claim with the Seoul District Court for more than $44 million in damages against Marsh, Marsh’s family member, and Min.
Australian singer gave testimony over alleged workplace bullying
Beyond its multi-billion-dollar revenues and global soft-power reach, the K-pop industry is widely known for exerting strict control over artists through long-term contracts with detailed and often rigid conditions.The legal dispute between NewJeans and ADOR has sent shockwaves through South Korea’s music industry, drawing widespread attention from international fans. Some have expressed sympathy for NewJeans over allegations of bullying and harassment allegedly directed or condoned by the company.Fans of Pham — the Vietnamese-Australian member of the group — submitted a petition to the South Korean government calling for an investigation into the alleged workplace bullying she and the group faced.In October 2024, Pham delivered a tearful testimony before South Korea’s parliament over the allegations.
“I know it’s not going to solve all the problems in the world, but if we just respect each other, at least there will be no problems with bullying and harassment in the workplace,” Reuters quoted Pham telling South Korean leaders.
One month later, South Korea’s employment ministry dismissed NewJeans’ workplace bullying complaint, stating that under the country’s Labour Standards Act, Pham was not legally classified as an “employee” of ADOR.The decision prompted several leaders to propose new legislation — now dubbed “Hanni’s Act” — aimed at extending protections against workplace bullying and harassment to artists.Pham also faced the possibility of deportation after her long-term employer-sponsored work visa was set to expire in early 2025 amid the ongoing legal dispute. Her parents confirmed in February that she had secured a new visa.That same month, The Chosun Daily reported that five of South Korea’s major industrial bodies issued a joint statement criticising NewJeans for “resolving private disputes through media campaigns and unilateral public statements rather than proper negotiations or legal procedures”.While the organisations said they did not oppose government regulation, they argued that contract disputes between agencies and artists should be addressed through industry self-regulation.
Source
