[Exclusive] Boryeong Labor Office's Reason for Dismissing Labor Inspection Petition Sparks Controversy

"Dismissed Due to Subcontractor Headquarters Being Outside Jurisdiction,"
Illegal Dispatch Allegations at Hongseong Company Remain Unaddressed

The Boryeong Branch of the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Office has sparked controversy after dismissing a petition for labor inspection regarding allegations of illegal dispatch at a manufacturing company in Hongseong, Chungnam. The branch cited the reason that the subcontractor's headquarters was outside its jurisdiction. However, it was revealed that the branch did not properly investigate whether the primary contractor in its jurisdiction had violated the dispatch law.

According to reporting by The Asia Business Daily on July 31, a man in his 30s, referred to as Mr. A, filed a petition with the Boryeong Branch in May, requesting an inspection into suspected violations of the 'Act on the Protection, etc. of Dispatched Workers' by Company B, a flooring manufacturer producing items such as floor sheets and tiles based in Hongseong County.

Mr. A claimed that outsourcing company C, which is headquartered in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, supplied workers to Company B's production line, and that these workers were directly supervised and managed by managers from the primary contractor.

In principle, worker dispatch to direct production processes in the manufacturing industry is prohibited. Even if contracts stipulate 'subcontracting,' 'outsourcing,' or 'partner company,' it can be ruled as illegal dispatch if the primary contractor directly instructs work details, methods, or working hours.

Mr. A stated that he joined Company C in December 2023 and worked at Company B until December 7, 2025, performing his tasks under the direction of a Company B team leader during his tenure.

He also alleged that Company B assigned workers belonging to Company C to production lines with relatively high risks of industrial accidents and knowingly overlooked the fact that some workers were not subscribed to the four major social insurances.

He additionally claimed that workers were made to work more than 52 hours a week, including overtime.

Mr. A insisted that Company C did not provide employment contracts and avoided paying severance by repeatedly processing workers' hiring and terminations on paper through other subcontractors without notifying the workers.

As a result, some employees were not even aware of which company they officially belonged to while actually working, according to Mr. A.

Nevertheless, it was found that on July 15, the Boryeong Branch dismissed Mr. A's petition for labor inspection, stating that since Company C's headquarters is in Pyeongtaek, it was outside their jurisdiction.

The problem is that the petition also included allegations of illegal dispatch by Company B, which is located in Hongseong and falls under the Boryeong Branch's jurisdiction, yet the branch failed to properly verify the facts regarding this issue.

There is criticism that by concluding the petition based only on the location of the subcontractor, key issues—such as the primary contractor's involvement in production processes and direct supervision and management, which are core in determining illegal dispatch—were omitted from the investigation.

An official from the Boryeong Branch told The Asia Business Daily in a phone call, "After confirming the details with the petitioner over the phone, we determined the petition involved Company C and instructed them to file with the proper jurisdiction."

The official added, "We did not separately verify with the petitioner regarding allegations of illegal dispatch by Company B."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.