–
[이코노믹리뷰=황대영 기자] Woori Financial Group Chairman Son Tae-seung and Shinhan Bank Bank Chairman Jin Ok-dong received severe disciplinary notice from the Financial Supervisory Service in relation to the Lime Asset Management Fund crisis.
According to the financial authorities on the 3rd, the FSS sent a notice of sanctions in advance to Woori Bank and Shinhan Bank, which are Lime Fund sellers, on the afternoon of that day. At the time of the Lime Fund crisis, Chairman Son Tae-seung, who was the head of Woori Bank, was reportedly suspended from work, and Shinhan Bank President Jin Ok-dong was notified of a censure warning.
The level of sanctions on financial company executives is divided into five stages: recommendation of dismissal, suspension of work, reprimand warning, cautious warning, and caution. Among them, censure warnings and above restrict employment in financial companies for 3 to 5 years. The Financial Supervisory Service is known to have imposed severe disciplinary action for incomplete responsibility over the sanctions. Lime Fund sold 357.7 billion won at Woori Bank and 2769 billion won at Shinhan Bank.
Earlier, the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) imposed a suspension of duties on former KB Securities CEO Yoon Kyung-eun, former CEO Kim Byeong-cheol, and former Daishin Securities CEO Na Jae-cheol, even in a sanction review against securities companies selling lime funds in November. In addition, KB Securities CEO Park Jung-rim was notified of the suspension of his job in advance, but he lowered the level by one level due to a censure warning in the sanctions review.
If such severe punishment is finalized through the Financial Services Commission following a sanctions review on the 25th, it becomes uncertain to challenge the three consecutive appointments of Chairman Son Tae-seung and three consecutive presidents Jin Ok-dong or chairman of the financial holding company. However, there is a possibility that Chairman Son Tae-seung succeeded in reappointing the dispute by filing a temporary injunction in an administrative lawsuit after objecting to severe disciplinary action in the DLF situation.
– .
