Oh my goodness! What did the judge say? Do you think it was the right judgement? My opinion on the decision right here.
I cannot believe Block B lost or maybe it’s that I didn’t want them to lose. I will think realistically about this case because I’m no lawyer. As BBCs and most people know, Block B sued Stardom at the beginning of the year because Stardom failed to pay them for six months and also that Stardom took money from Block B’s parents. That’s the main thing about the case. Well, after six months the judge has the verdict and here what the judge said:
“From the evidence provided so far, it is difficult to claim that the label purposely did not pay Block B. It is also difficult to say that the label did not provide proper facilities such as studios and dorms, and it is also difficult to say that they did not provide education and guidance. From written records, it cannot be said that Stardom Entertainment violated their management obligations.“
The court added, “There is a possibility that the musical income of 430,000,000 KRW (approximately $385,000 USD) and the event income of 5,000,000 KRW (approximately $4,500 USD) was not properly taken care of. However, from just the evidence provided, it cannot be said that the label purposely kept the money from the members.“
Finally, the court said, “The label has promised to pay the members the part that they have not been paid. There is a big probability that the unpaid fees will be paid. It is difficult to say that the exclusive contract has been nullified because of a violation of management obligations.“
Okay, first paragraph of statement, it doesn’t make sense to me. Judge, all you have to do is go to the dorm and studio to see if it’s appropriate for Block B or not. And how is it difficult to claim that the label purposely did not pay Block B? How can you forget to pay your money makers their money for 6 MONTHS. That doesn’t make sense. Now the second paragraph, it’s basically saying that they’re not getting the money back that their parents gave to the label because there wasn’t enough evidence to support Block B’s accusation.
Again, I’m not a lawyer, but this whole thing, aside from the third paragraph, didn’t make sense to me. I don’t know if it was the right decision or not because I don’t know what type of evidence that were provided. I just cannot say, “oh the judge is wrong,” but I’m NOT saying that he’s right either because how do you know that Stardom did not purposely keep the money? How do you know if Stardom didn’t purposely pay them? What papers can they provide to say that? Unless they have pay stubs of each of the members’ check then Stardom didn’t pay them. It’s that simple. As for the parents giving money, if the parents kept the transaction papers of them giving the money then they should have gotten their money back once Stardom had to the money to pay them back. That’s how most business should operate, but then again I’m a journalist and don’t know anything about the law. So until there is a BBC law major to break it down for us then we can only assume. *For source click here*
Do you think that it was the right call?