As the exclusive contract dispute surrounding the group FIFTY FIFTY continues to generate controversy, The Givers have released a statement calling for a halt to what they describe as "coercive framing," in response to Attract's public reveal of a recorded conversation alleging external intervention.

On July 3, The Givers announced through an official statement: "Attrakt is distorting the facts, making it seem as if our representative, An Seong-il, discussed the future of FIFTY FIFTY members unilaterally with Warner Music Korea. However, this is not the case."

Previously, Attrakt revealed a recorded phone call between its representative, Jeon Hong-jun, and an executive of Warner Music Korea, stating, "An Seong-il, without approval from Attrakt's representative Jeon Hong-jun, unilaterally proceeded with the buyout of FIFTY FIFTY. In addition, further criminal actions from An Seong-il, representative of The Givers, have been confirmed."

The Givers explained: "Warner Music Korea proposed a 'label deal' structure. This is an investment method used both domestically and internationally, where smaller companies lacking funds or infrastructure are kept under the umbrella of a global distributor's label. The operation mode remains the same, but funds and infrastructure are provided to facilitate smoother operations. This proposal was a good signal to Attract, which was in need of funds and stable operations at the time. We thought it would be beneficial for the company and the artists in the long run, so we conveyed Warner Music Korea's proposal."

The Givers continued, "At that time, Representative Jeon Hong-jun was interested in listing Attrakt on the stock exchange and expressed his refusal to Warner Music Korea, later showing interest in advanced investment. In response, Warner Music Korea revised its proposal accordingly. We didn't have any decision-making power and didn't play any unnecessary role in this process. It's inconceivable that Attract communicated with Warner Music Korea without knowing the details, and Warner Music Korea changed its proposal direction according to the opinion of Attrakt, which had decision-making authority."

The Givers refuted Attrakt's claims, stating: "Attrakt is alleging as if we, dissatisfied with their refusal to accept Warner Music Korea's label deal, plotted from behind the scenes. However, this is absolutely not true. We are a company that specializes in planning, production, and producing, and the contract relationship between the artist and the agency has no direct relation to our business operations, and we gain no advantage from this process. We demand a halt to the coercive framing of assigning responsibility for issues between the agency and the artist to an unrelated company."

Earlier, the legal representative of the FIFTY FIFTY members, Barun Law, announced on June 28: "Four of the members, through their legal representative, filed a suspension of the effect of the exclusive contract to the Seoul Central District Court on June 19, and the trial is currently in progress."

Following is the full statement from The Givers:

We first express deep regret towards Attrakt, which has been causing confusion to all parties involved, as well as the press and the public, based on non-factual circumstances.

The reason we have not made any position or response until now and maintained a neutral position is because we did not want to create unnecessary controversy by revealing unrelated facts when the issues between the affiliated company and the artist will be legally discussed between the parties involved.

Attrakt is distorting the facts, making it seem as if our representative, An Seong-il, discussed the future of FIFTY FIFTY members unilaterally with Warner Music Korea. However, this is not the case.

Warner Music Korea proposed a 'label deal' structure. Warner Music hoped to discuss this with Attract's representative, Jeon Hong-jun, and because this was communicated, a connection was made between Attrakt and Warner Music Korea.

The 'label deal' structure is an investment method used both domestically and internationally. It involves keeping smaller companies lacking funds or infrastructure under the umbrella of a global distributor's label, while the operating mode remains the same, but funds and infrastructure are provided to facilitate smoother operations.

At the time, Attrakt was lacking in funds and needed stable operations, so we saw this proposal as a positive signal. We believed it would be beneficial for both the company and the artists in the long run, so we relayed Warner Music Korea's proposal.

At that time, Representative Jeon Hong-jun was hoping for Attrakt to go public and expressed his refusal to Warner Music Korea, later showing interest in advanced investment. Warner Music Korea revised its proposal accordingly. We were not decision-makers in this and did not play any unnecessary role. It's inconceivable that Attrakt communicated with Warner Music Korea without knowing the details, and Warner Music Korea changed its proposal direction according to Attrakt's opinion, who had decision-making authority.

Attrakt alleges as if we, unhappy with their refusal to accept Warner Music Korea's label deal, plotted behind the scenes. However, this is absolutely not the case. We are a company that specializes in planning, production, and producing. The contract relationship between the artist and the agency has no direct relation to our business operations, and we gain no advantage from this process. We ask for a halt to the forced framing of assigning responsibility for issues between the agency and the artist to an unrelated company.

Our primary reason for declaring a work stoppage with Attract was due to fundamental structural problems that have been ongoing since before Attrakt was established, and the difficulties of production operation due to insufficient budget. We attempted to improve this by establishing the new corporation, Attrakt, to minimize existing risks and introduce a new system, but this was not successful.

We have been working to build a good reputation for Attrakt by carrying out various tasks, and for about 2 years from before its establishment to the present day with Cupid, 4 to 5 of our company's employees have been handling the workload of more than 20 people, pouring all of our energy, stamina, and infrastructure into it. However, as the chronic problems were not improving, we spoke with Representative Jeon Hong-jun on several occasions, but were unable to reach an agreement and the project was concluded.

Even during this process, both companies wanted to actively cooperate in any business that could help each other, not creating a situation where both suffer damage. Even after the work ended on May 31, we were fulfilling our responsibilities for overseas promotions.

The reason we have not made any position statement is that all the attention and damage caused by the false framing that strays from the essence of the issue will eventually go back to the artists of FIFTY FIFTY. Attrakt is still doubting those who have devoted themselves to FIFTY FIFTY and the project, tarnishing their honor, and repaying those who gave much help in difficult times in this way.

Please focus on the issues between the company and the artists. We ask you to stop the speculative false framing and actions that damage our honor.

The truth will be revealed through legal procedures, so please stop unilaterally claiming to incite the press and the public with malicious false facts that stray from the essential issues. If the spread of false facts and defamation continues, we will respond strongly through legal means.

Copyright © 2023 Kpop Reporter. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.