[비즈한국] Some employees of a service firm contracted by Kyobo Asset Trust, a subsidiary of Kyobo Life Insurance, have been implicated in an assault case. It is reported that they assaulted an employee of a construction firm who was exercising a lien on the property. While the victim's side claims that the service staff were acting under the instructions of Kyobo Asset Trust during the assault, Kyobo Asset Trust maintains that no specific instructions were given and that the service firm overreacted.
On the 13th, about 10 service personnel, reportedly under contract with Kyobo Asset Trust, assaulted a construction company employee identified as A at unit ○○○ of building ○○○ at Jukjeon Terrace & 139 Townhouse in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province.
The unit where the incident occurred had its lien recognized by the court due to unpaid repair costs for defects, and employee A was staying there to maintain possession. According to A, the moment the front door was opened to retrieve a food delivery, the service staff forced their way inside. A claims that the service staff began assaulting them once inside the home and subsequently dragged them out of the unit by force. Following the victim's report, police and emergency services were dispatched to the scene. Some of the service personnel were taken into custody on-site, and two of them were arrested on the afternoon of the 14th.
However, the reasons for the arrests are being described differently by the victim's side and Kyobo Asset Trust, which hired the service firm. While the victim’s side believes the severity of the assault is the cause, Kyobo Asset Trust maintains that it was for personal reasons unrelated to the site situation. BizHankook requested confirmation regarding the grounds for arrest from the Yongin Seobu Police Station, which is handling the case, but a police official replied, "It is difficult to confirm as the matter is currently under investigation."
Jukjeon Terrace & 139 Townhouse, where the incident took place, is a site of confrontation between the trust company, Kyobo Asset Trust, and the developer, Bojeong PJT, over possession rights. (Related article: Kyobo Life Faces Ethical Management Concerns Amid Consecutive Scandals at Subsidiary Kyobo Asset Trust). The conflict began when the contractor, Donggang Construction, entered court receivership, delaying completion by more than nine months. During this process, nearly half of the pre-sale buyers filed lawsuits demanding contract termination, and the developer operated some units as temporary residences to prevent long-term vacancies. Kyobo Asset Trust deemed this illegal leasing and filed a lawsuit for eviction.
Last August, Kyobo Asset Trust signed a contract with a service firm, B, delegating all management tasks including building administration and maintenance. Service personnel were also stationed on-site. Kyobo Asset Trust explained the deployment of service personnel as "a measure to resolve unauthorized occupation." However, the developer protested, calling it "de facto forced eviction without a court order," and has been holding protests in front of the Kyobo Life Building in Gwanghwamun and the Kyobo Tower in Gangnam.
The point of contention in this assault case is the management responsibility of Kyobo Asset Trust. The victim's side claims that during the assault, the service staff said, "We are here from Kyobo." Based on this statement and the fact that the incident occurred in a unit where a lien was recognized, the developer Bojeong PJT raised the possibility of Kyobo Asset Trust's involvement. They argue that the service firm mobilized physical force to disrupt the possession of the unit currently under lien, and suggest that Kyobo Asset Trust's on-site measures may have influenced the act.
Bojeong PJT stated, "(The service personnel) cannot act arbitrarily without instructions from the client. This incident is not merely a violent crime, but a case where a large conglomerate trust company exercised private service violence disguised as official authority."
Kyobo Asset Trust acknowledged that the assault was committed by service personnel they had commissioned. However, they stated that there was no instruction or involvement from the company in the assault itself. A Kyobo Asset Trust official explained, "The service firm overreacted at the scene. There was no fact of any company instruction regarding the assault."