On March 13, the Seoul Central District Court held the second hearing in a damages lawsuit filed by cosmetics brand A against Kim Soo Hyun and his agency. The company is seeking approximately 2.86 billion won (about $1.9 million) in compensation.
During the hearing, the court mainly reviewed the progress of the case without moving forward with substantive arguments. The lawsuit began after the cosmetics brand terminated its model contract with Kim Soo Hyun. During the first hearing held in November last year, the plaintiff argued that the contract allowed termination if the model became involved in a social controversy.
Brand A claimed that rumors surrounding Kim Soo Hyun’s alleged relationship timeline could potentially fall under a violation of the “duty to maintain dignity” clause in the endorsement agreement. The company also increased its claim from the original 500 million won to 2.86 billion won in damages.
Kim Soo Hyun’s legal team strongly disputed the claim, arguing that the rumors referenced by the company occurred before the endorsement contract was signed and therefore could not constitute a breach of contract. They also pointed out that even after the company announced the contract termination in March, Kim Soo Hyun’s promotional images reportedly remained on the brand’s Korean and Japanese websites and in Japanese retail stores until June.
Kim Soo-hyun’s legal representative from LKB & Partners explained, “Unlike the first hearing, the presiding judge has changed this time. The court simply confirmed previous discussions and recorded the case’s progress before adjourning.” The lawyer also stated, “The court asked about the status of Kim Soo-hyun’s complaint against Kim Se‑ui, the operator of the YouTube channel Garo Sero Research Institute, but no conclusion has been reached yet. We expect a decision to be made soon.”
Regarding the legal dispute with brand A, the lawyer said, “The company is claiming damages, but our position is that termination of the contract is not possible, so the amount they claim cannot be recognized. The contract clearly states that rumors, gossip, or unverified claims cannot serve as grounds for termination. Brand A argues that the allegations raised by Garo Sero Research Institute are factual, but we believe they are merely rumors.” The lawyer added, “Ultimately, all judgments should come after the results of the criminal case. Only then can we discuss the extent of damages.”
In response, the plaintiff stated that all related promotional materials had since been removed and that local agencies in Japan had been instructed to stop using the images. With both sides maintaining their arguments, the legal battle appears far from over. The next hearing is scheduled for April 24, when further discussions on the case are expected to continue.
Sources: Daum | 엑스포츠뉴스
You must be logged in to post a comment.