The ongoing wage dispute between K-pop group THE BOYZ and their agency One Hundred Label has reached a boiling point, with both sides trading sharp rebuttals.
Agency Highlights Massive Advance Payments
One Hundred Label’s largest shareholder revealed that the agency disbursed a total of 165 billion won in contract salaries to all 11 members, equating to 15 billion won per individual.
An agency executive described this payout as “an extraordinary figure that surpasses typical operational costs of 1 to 3 billion won by over ten times.” The executive added that it created significant disparities, even prompting concern among related staff over perceived inequities.
Officials clarified that these funds carry the nature of “pre-distribution advances,” intended for release post-revenue sharing. They noted, “Even after partial repayment upon contract renewal, members have only realized interest equivalent to roughly 118 billion won.”
Agency Cites ‘Selfishness’ in Payment Recovery Efforts
Despite reviewing internal accounts, the agency attributes its pursuit of fixed salary repayments to the members’ “selfish” stance.
The executive emphasized, “Malicious online campaigns from the artist side have inflated the artists’ perceived value, making it impossible to recoup the already advanced pre-group funds and resulting in substantial losses.” They further stated that the artist’s management had not settled any partial repayments agency-wide.
“If the contract terms confirm the full pre-distribution nature of these advances, authorities expect immediate repayment of the collected fixed amounts,” the executive added.
Members Voice Strong Dissatisfaction
In response, THE BOYZ members express frustration over the accuracy and methodology of total contract salary settlements, launching pointed criticisms at the agency representative through various channels.
They resent failing to receive precise fixed salaries despite functioning as key assets for the agency. Members argue that the touted “15 billion won” figure represents a contract-related bonus or advance, distinct from standard settlements.
Sources indicate no valid justification exists for withholding these funds, framing the issue as agency selfishness rather than a mere financial matter, but one of eroded trust patterns.
