'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
On August 14, 2024, ADOR's CEO, Min Hee-jin, rebutted the accusations of covering up an alleged s*xual harassment case and requested the female victim to address the issue with HYBE LABELS through an eighteen-page Google document released via the official Instagram account.
Previously, a former ADOR employee claimed she was a victim of Executive A's s*xual harassment and bullying at the workplace through her personal Instagram account, narrating about the instances when she felt unfair at the workplace. Subsequently, she revealed to JTBC news on August 13, 2024, that Min Hee-jin allegedly covered up the s*xual harassment issue to protect Executive A.
Trending
Min Hee-jin claimed that the female employee, aka B, disseminated false accusations against her
Min Hee-jin disclosed in the statement that the female employee, aka B, has been spreading false claims regarding the information that she had sided with Executive A regarding the s*xual harassment issue. The ADOR's CEO stated the victim had revealed distorted and fabricated facts about her not being an objective and fair Chief Executive Officer.
She also shared that the ongoing controversy no longer remained a personal issue as the female actively agreed with the Dispatch's previous claims and demanded a public apology. Min Hee-jin said that it became an obligation of her to disclose the truth and narrate the circumstances.
ADOR's CEO further claimed that Executive A never commented that the female employee cited in her complaint to be s*xual harassment and questioned her credibility as a worker.
According to the female employee, Executive A from ADOR requested her to attend a dinner with an advertiser. However, she was reluctant to appear at the gathering, as she felt her presence was not required. She also revealed that Executive A reasoned her appearance because she was the young female representative. Subsequently, she appeared at the dinner.
In contrast, ADOR's CEO revealed she found multiple distortions through a female employee's s*xual harassment report. She revealed that the purpose of the meeting was clear as the alleged victim had the responsibility of managing advertisers. She cited that the actual intention behind the meeting was only for business, which was having dinner and visiting a store, as disclosed by Executive A, B, and the Global Brand Advertiser C.
ADOR's CEO also stated that the s*xual harassment comment was 'young female,' which Executive A claimed that he never used the aforementioned words. Executive A also reasoned that since a female employee's salary and experience were much higher, he could have never used the following term.
ADOR's CEO concluded her statement by stating that disciplinary action against Executive A was decided by HYBE LABELS. She further requested the female employee to address the conflict with the corporation instead of spreading hate against her.
