Temporary General Meeting Decision at Today’s YooDoo Board of Directors Meeting
Possibility of Min Hee-jin’s Dismissal, Likely to Be Subject to Court Decision,
,
,
, ‘YooDoo, a subsidiary label embroiled in conflict with HIVE, has decided to hold a temporary shareholders’ meeting on the 31st. It appears that a motion to dismiss CEO Min Hee-jin will be presented at the shareholders’ meeting, but the court’s decision on whether HIVE can exercise its voting rights is likely to be a determining factor.’,
,
, ‘On the 10th, YooDoo stated, “Today’s board meeting, with all members including the audit committee present, resolved to hold a temporary shareholders’ meeting on May 31st,” and “The agenda for the temporary shareholders’ meeting was decided on the basis of HIVE’s request.” In attendance at the meeting were CEO Min, Deputy CEO Shin Dong-hoon, Senior Creative Director Kim Ye-min and one audit committee member.’,
,
, ‘The agenda for the temporary meeting is ‘Dismissal and Appointment of New Directors.’ HIVE plans to dismiss all YooDoo executives, including CEO Min, at this temporary meeting. However, due to CEO Min’s side filing a motion for an injunction against the exercise of voting rights at the shareholders’ meeting on the 7th, HIVE will have to await the court’s decision in order to exercise its voting rights.’,
,
, ‘The injunctive relief motion requested that HIVE, which holds 80% of YooDoo’s shares, be prohibited from exercising its voting rights on the motion to dismiss CEO Min. At the time, CEO Min’s side explained the background of the injunctive relief request as being “to protect the value of YooDoo’s artists, New JiNse, and YooDoo as a company.”‘,
,
, ‘If the court grants the injunctive relief, the convening of the temporary shareholders’ meeting would be meaningless. With CEO Min leading all activities related to New JiNse’s comeback and others, the ongoing conflict between YooDoo and HIVE is expected to continue.’,
,
,
,
,
, ‘Separately, just before the board meeting, YooDoo released an official statement claiming that HIVE’s audit team had conducted an unlawful audit. YooDoo stated in the statement, “By early this morning (the 10th), an unfortunate incident occurred where YooDoo members suffered due to an unlawful audit based on abnormal issues raised by HIVE’s audit team.”‘,
,
, ‘YooDoo explained, “HIVE’s audit team began an audit of YooDoo’s styling directing team around 7 p.m. the previous day (9th) after work hours,” and “The audit continued for over 5 hours, and eventually, it reached a point where they followed the team member working within the company all the way to his house, demanding not only his laptop but also his personal phone, which is neither owned by the company nor related to work, showcasing that the audit went beyond the scope of business.”‘,
,
, ‘Furthermore, YooDoo stated, “HIVE, after disclosing the contents of the audit to the media last month, has been engaging in various forms of negative publicity,” and “Concerned that this forced audit may be used in media play, we felt obliged to inform the facts out of fear that it may be exploited for negative publicity.”‘,
,
,