It has emerged that former ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin—now the head of OK Records—filed a criminal complaint against officials at the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office who investigated her workplace harassment case. Police later found insufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing and declined to refer the case for prosecution.
According to a July 9 report by JoongAng Ilbo, the Mapo Police Station decided on February 6 not to refer several employees of the Seoul Western Branch of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office, which falls under the Ministry of Employment and Labor, to prosecutors. The officials had been accused of preparing false official documents, using false official documents, and neglecting their official duties.
Min filed the complaint last year, alleging that the officials handling the workplace harassment investigation incorrectly recorded the timing of events in official documents and included false information.
The workplace harassment case began in August 2024, when a former ADOR employee identified only as “A” filed a complaint with labor authorities, alleging that she had suffered verbal abuse from Min.
Employee A also claimed she was harassed by executive “B,” who was reportedly a close associate of Min. According to A, after she reported the alleged harassment to the company, Min attempted to protect executive B and cover up the incident.
In March of last year, the Seoul Western Labor Office concluded that some of Min’s remarks were capable of causing physical and psychological distress and worsening the employee’s working environment, qualifying as workplace harassment under Korean law.
Min argued that labor officials incorrectly recorded the time intervals between messages she sent in a KakaoTalk group chat involving the complainants in the workplace harassment case.
She further alleged that the officials created false official records by making it appear that separate messages had been sent consecutively when they had not.
Min also claimed that investigators failed to give her an opportunity to respond to or defend herself regarding each specific statement at issue during the investigation.
The officials, however, reportedly told police that any mistakes were unintentional clerical errors, not deliberate misconduct.
Separately, Min filed a lawsuit challenging the administrative fine. Judge Jung Cheol-min of the Seoul Western District Court’s Civil Division 61 later ruled to uphold part of the Labor Ministry’s decision while overturning the remainder.
After investigating the complaint, police concluded that although some information in the documents had been recorded incorrectly, the errors did not rise to the level of criminal misconduct.
According to police, the records did not fabricate statements or attribute remarks to Min that she had never made. Instead, investigators determined that the officials had made contextual recording errors, such as mistakes involving the timing of events.
Regarding Min’s claim that she was denied an opportunity to respond, police found that investigators had reviewed the written opinion submitted by Min’s attorney and conducted a sufficiently detailed evaluation of her conduct before reaching their conclusions.
Attorneys representing Min told JoongAng Ilbo that they were not in a position to comment on the matter.
