[BizHanKook] The trial date for the remand of Hana Financial Group Chairman Ham Young-joo’s hiring scandal case has been set for October. In January, the Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling regarding Chairman Ham’s charges of obstruction of business and remanded the case, while upholding the guilty verdict for violating the Equal Employment Opportunity and Work-Family Balance Assistance Act. The remand trial will focus on the obstruction of business charges, and attention is now on what conclusion the court will reach.
The Seoul Western District Court’s 2-3 Criminal Division scheduled the first trial date for Chairman Ham Young-joo’s obstruction of business remand case for October 1 at 11:10 AM. This hearing will take place approximately eight months after the Supreme Court’s remand ruling on January 29 and the subsequent case filing on February 3. The defendant is required to attend the first trial, and the court sent a summons to Chairman Ham on August 28.
Chairman Ham was indicted in 2018 on charges of obstruction of business for allegedly intervening in the open recruitment process for new employees between 2015 and 2016 to favor specific candidates. He was also charged with violating the Equal Employment Opportunity and Work-Family Balance Assistance Act (Equal Employment Opportunity Act) for pre-setting a 4-to-1 ratio for male and female final candidates during the 2015–2016 recruitment period. Jang Ki-yong, the then-Vice President of Hana Bank, and Hana Bank itself were also indicted on charges of obstruction of business and violations of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, respectively.
In the first trial in March 2022, former Vice President Jang Ki-yong was sentenced to six months in prison suspended for two years, and Hana Bank was fined 7 million won, while Chairman Ham Young-joo was acquitted. At the time, the court ruled there was no evidence that Chairman Ham ordered illegal hiring and that discriminatory hiring occurred independently of the bank president’s intentions.
However, the appellate court reached a different conclusion. It partially overturned the first trial’s acquittal of Chairman Ham, sentencing him to six months in prison suspended for two years, plus a 3 million won fine. The court ruled that Chairman Ham had intervened in the selection process for the 2016 group interview and was involved in the gender-imbalanced selection of new hires from 2015 to 2016, finding him guilty of some obstruction of business charges and the violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act.
When Chairman Ham received a suspended sentence in the second trial, eyes turned to the Supreme Court’s judgment. Under the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies, an individual sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier who is currently serving a suspended sentence cannot serve as an executive of a financial company. Chairman Ham successfully secured a reappointment in March 2025 during the trial, extending his term as chairman until March 2028.
On January 29, the Supreme Court ruled to remand the case regarding the obstruction of business charges with the intent of acquittal, while dismissing the appeal regarding the Equal Employment Opportunity Act violation. The Supreme Court determined that there was insufficient proof of Chairman Ham’s collusion in the 2016 hiring irregularities and a lack of objective data to confirm that meetings were held to select additional successful candidates. Furthermore, the court found the testimony of HR hiring managers, who stated they never received instructions to review candidates who failed to meet selection criteria, to be credible.
The Supreme Court stated, "The appellate court’s ruling contained errors that affected the judgment, including a failure to conduct necessary deliberation and a misunderstanding of legal principles regarding the principle of oral argument, the principle of directness, and joint principal offenders." Conversely, regarding the violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, the court found no errors in the original judgment and upheld the guilty verdict with a 3 million won fine. The appeals by former Vice President Jang and Hana Bank were all dismissed.
Chairman Ham will once again contest the obstruction of business charges in the remand trial. Unlike the Supreme Court, which is a court of law, a remand trial is a court of fact, meaning new facts or evidence can be submitted. However, unless there is evidence to change the existing facts, the court must follow the legal and factual findings presented by the Supreme Court. Since the Supreme Court returned the obstruction of business charges to the lower court with the intent of acquittal, it is highly likely that the remand trial will follow this outcome.
Meanwhile, Hana Financial Group has not issued a statement regarding the remand trial.