For more than a decade, Bang Si-hyuk was the industry’s model founder—the producer-turned-strategist who built Big Hit into HYBE and helped turn BTS into a world-shaping phenomenon. In 2025, that narrative flipped. Allegations around HYBE’s pre-IPO dealings, police raids, and boardroom warfare with a breakaway label have dragged the chairman to the center of K-pop’s most consequential corporate scandal to date.
The spark: alleged unfair trading tied to HYBE’s IPO
South Korea’s financial watchdog referred Bang Si-hyuk to prosecutors in mid-July 2025 after probing claims that pre-IPO investors were misled and steered into selling shares to an entity linked to Bang and associates, who then allegedly profited after listing. HYBE denies wrongdoing and says the listing followed all rules, but the referral escalated the case from rumor to criminal probe.
Investigators then raided HYBE’s headquarters on July 24, 2025, seizing materials tied to the share-trading investigation—an inflection point that turned corporate risk into a public crisis.
A parallel fire: HYBE vs. ADOR vs. NewJeans
Running alongside the securities probe is the bitter HYBE–ADOR split. Courts in March 2025 blocked NewJeans (who briefly attempted to rebrand as NJZ) from leaving ADOR, keeping the act under the HYBE umbrella while the parent–subsidiary feud raged on. HYBE vowed to keep supporting the group, even as public filings and leaked claims stirred fan outrage.
The dispute has included explosive allegations—such as claims from NewJeans’ parents that Bang tried to obstruct the group’s performance at ComplexCon Hong Kong—amplifying the narrative that corporate power plays were spilling onto artists’ schedules. (HYBE disputes wrongdoing; the claim remains an allegation.)
By July 2025, police declined to charge former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin for breach of trust, and HYBE said it would appeal that decision. In September, the conflict widened to a fight over a 26-billion-won put option, underscoring how legal risk now extends well beyond artist management.
Key dates (2025)
-
Mar 21: Seoul court blocks NewJeans from leaving ADOR; activities under the label remain in force.
-
Jul 15–16: Regulators refer Bang to prosecutors over alleged unfair trading tied to the IPO.
-
Jul 24: Police raid HYBE HQ in connection with the share-trading probe.
-
Aug 6: Bang emails staff expressing regret for confusion amid the controversy.
-
Sep 11: HYBE and Min Hee-jin clash in court over a 26-billion-won put option.
What the allegations say—and why they matter
Regulatory risk: The securities case centers on whether investors were deceived pre-IPO—a serious offense under Korea’s Capital Markets Act. Referral to prosecutors signals that watchdogs believe the evidence merits a criminal review. Outcomes could range from no charges to indictments, fines, or worse—any of which would ripple across HYBE’s governance and investor confidence.
Governance & control: The ADOR saga exposed structural fault lines in HYBE’s multi-label model: how far a parent company can go in steering a subsidiary, who controls IP and schedules, and how disputes affect artists’ livelihoods. Even without criminal findings, the civil fight—now including the put-option case—raises questions about shareholder agreements and independence in K-pop’s label architecture.
Reputation & operations: Bang’s August company-wide note acknowledged the turmoil’s toll on staff, artists, and partners. That message, coupled with the raid imagery and rolling court dates, cements a reputational crisis that HYBE must manage alongside day-to-day releases, tours, and brand deals.
The counter-narrative from HYBE
HYBE insists its IPO complied with regulations and says it’s cooperating fully with authorities. It continues to project business-as-usual in artist promotions, while pursuing legal remedies in the ADOR matter (including an appeal after police declined to charge Min). Whether that posture can hold depends on prosecutorial decisions and court rulings in the months ahead.
What to watch next
-
Prosecutors’ call on whether to indict Bang and other executives following the regulator’s referral.
-
Civil outcomes in the HYBE–ADOR suits, especially the put-option case that could reshape the economics of label leadership inside conglomerates.
-
Artist pipeline stability—release schedules, tours, and endorsements—if legal headlines keep dominating fan discourse. (Fans already saw how litigation pressure can spill over into stages and content plans.)
