[비즈한국] The date for the remand trial of Hana Financial Group Chairman Ham Young-joo, regarding the hiring irregularities case, has been set for October. In January, the Supreme Court overturned the original verdict concerning Chairman Ham’s obstruction of business charges 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, Criminal Division 2-3, has scheduled the first hearing for the remand trial of Chairman Ham Young-joo’s obstruction of business case for 11:10 AM on October 1. This trial comes approximately eight months after the Supreme Court’s remand ruling on January 29 and the case’s registration on February 3. The defendant is required to attend the first hearing, and the court sent a subpoena to Chairman Ham on August 28.
Chairman Ham was indicted in 2018 on charges of obstruction of business for allegedly intervening to favor certain applicants during the open recruitment process for new employees from 2015 to 2016 while serving as President of Hana Bank. He was also charged with violating the Equal Employment Opportunity and Work-Family Balance Assistance Act (Equal Employment Opportunity Act) by pre-setting a 4-to-1 male-to-female ratio for final successful candidates during the 2015–2016 recruitment periods. Jang Ki-yong, who was then Executive Vice President of Hana Bank, and the Hana Bank corporate entity were also indicted for 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 found no evidence that Chairman Ham had ordered illegal hiring, determining that the 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, and a fine of 3 million won. The court found that Chairman Ham had intervened in the selection of candidates for the 2016 group interview stage and was involved in the gender-imbalanced selection of new employees from 2015 to 2016, thus ruling him guilty of some of the obstruction of business charges and the violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act.
When Chairman Ham received a suspended sentence in the second trial, all eyes turned to the Supreme Court. Under the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (Financial Company Governance Act), an individual under a suspended sentence for a penalty of imprisonment or heavier cannot serve as an executive of a financial company. Chairman Ham had successfully won reappointment in March 2025 during the ongoing trial, extending his tenure as chairman until March 2028.
On January 29, the Supreme Court ruled to remand the case regarding the obstruction of business charges with an acquittal in mind, while dismissing Chairman Ham’s appeal regarding the violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act. The Supreme Court determined that there was insufficient evidence to prove that Chairman Ham colluded in the 2016 hiring irregularities and that there was a lack of objective data to support the existence of a meeting to select additional candidates. It also found the testimony of the HR hiring staff, who stated they had never received instructions to review candidates who failed to meet the criteria, to be credible.
The Supreme Court stated, "The original (second trial) verdict contains errors that affected the judgment, such as failing to conduct the necessary examination and misunderstanding legal principles regarding the principle of oral proceedings, direct examination, and joint principal offenders." On the other hand, it upheld the guilty verdict and 3 million won fine for the violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, finding no errors in the original judgment regarding that charge. The appeals of former Vice President Jang and Hana Bank were all dismissed.
Chairman Ham’s side will contest the obstruction of business charges again in the remand trial. Unlike the Supreme Court, which is a court of law, the remand trial is a court of fact, meaning new evidence or facts can be submitted. However, unless there is evidence that fundamentally alters the existing facts, the court must follow the legal and factual determinations presented by the Supreme Court. Since the Supreme Court returned the case to the lower court with the intention of an acquittal on the obstruction of business charges, it is highly likely that the remand trial will result in a similar outcome.
Meanwhile, Hana Financial Group has not issued a statement regarding the remand trial.