Tragic Fall at Hansol Paper Factory: Worker Found Dead After Company Failed to Notice 10-Hour Disappearance

The Shocking Discovery That Exposed Corporate Negligence

In a tragic incident that has sent shockwaves through South Korea's industrial sector, a 30-year-old worker at Hansol Paper's factory in Daejeon was found dead inside operating machinery after falling through an access hole. What makes this case particularly disturbing is that the company was completely unaware of the accident for over 10 hours, only discovering the worker's fate when his wife filed a missing person report with police. The incident, which occurred on July 16, 2025, has become a symbol of corporate negligence and inadequate workplace safety measures in one of South Korea's major corporations.

The victim, identified only as Mr. A, was a regular employee in the processing department who had joined the company just one month prior to the accident. He was working the afternoon shift, transferring waste paper and defective products into a pulp manufacturing tank when he fell through a 30-centimeter-wide opening into the machinery below. His colleagues, who were present during the shift change at around 4 PM, assumed he had left work early and failed to notice his disappearance. This shocking lack of awareness about employee whereabouts has become a central point of criticism against the company's management practices.

The Fatal Accident: How Safety Protocols Failed

According to police investigations based on factory CCTV footage, the accident occurred at approximately 3:30 PM on July 16. Mr. A was performing routine work, moving waste paper into the pulp manufacturing equipment when he fell through an access opening that measured 30 centimeters in width and had a depth of 5.6 meters. The machinery, weighing approximately 36 tons, was actively operating with water and paper pulp mixture at about 50% capacity when the accident happened.

What's particularly alarming is that the opening through which Mr. A fell lacked proper safety barriers or sensors to prevent such accidents. Labor authorities who inspected the site found that fall prevention safety measures were severely inadequate. The Ministry of Employment and Labor's Industrial Safety and Health headquarters director Kim Jong-yoon visited the accident site and confirmed that safety measures to prevent falls were insufficient, describing it as a 'backward country-type accident' occurring in a major corporation. The investigation revealed that basic safety equipment such as safety rails or sensors that should have been installed around dangerous openings were missing, relying only on CCTV monitoring.

Corporate Response: Too Little, Too Late

The company's response to the incident has drawn fierce criticism from labor groups and government authorities alike. Hansol Paper was completely unaware that one of its employees had gone missing during a shift change, despite having proper attendance and safety protocols supposedly in place. It wasn't until Mr. A's wife contacted police at 11:56 PM reporting her husband's failure to return home that any search began. Police used mobile phone location tracking to determine he was still at the factory premises, leading to the discovery of his body at 1:50 AM on July 17.

The company's delayed response has become a major focus of the investigation. Labor authorities are examining not only the inadequate safety measures but also why the company failed to notice a missing employee for such an extended period. Following the tragedy, Hansol Paper CEO Han Kyung-rok issued an apology on the company website on July 18, stating they would 'thoroughly investigate the exact cause of the accident and faithfully participate in the investigation process'. The company also announced a complete shutdown of operations at the Sintanjin factory, with plans to resume production on August 1, 2025. However, critics argue this response came far too late and represents a reactive rather than proactive approach to worker safety.

Legal Consequences and Government Investigation

The incident has triggered multiple investigations by both police and labor authorities under various laws including the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, which holds corporate executives personally responsible for workplace fatalities. Police have filed charges of workplace negligent homicide against factory officials and are conducting a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding the accident. The Ministry of Employment and Labor is simultaneously investigating potential violations of the Industrial Safety and Health Act and the Serious Accidents Punishment Act.

Since Hansol Paper and its Sintanjin factory fall under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act's jurisdiction, and Mr. A was a regular employee of Hansol Paper, the investigation results could lead to charges not only against the safety supervisor and factory manager but also against CEO Han Kyung-rok himself. The government has issued a work stoppage order for the process where the accident occurred and has indicated that operations will remain suspended until fundamental safety measures are implemented. Labor authorities have emphasized their commitment to conducting a thorough investigation that will identify the root causes of the accident, including the company's delayed recognition of the incident and subsequent response failures.

Public Outrage and Labor Movement Response

The incident has sparked outrage among South Korea's labor organizations and civil society groups. On July 21, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) Daejeon branch and the Daejeon Movement Headquarters for Creating a World Without Major Disasters held press conferences in front of the Hansol Paper Sintanjin factory, demanding thorough investigation and severe punishment for those responsible. Labor activists criticized the company for repeatedly failing to prevent industrial accidents, noting that Hansol Paper had previous fatal accidents in 2019 and 2021.

The protesters highlighted the particularly vulnerable situation of workplaces without labor unions, arguing that Hansol Paper represents how poor working conditions and safety vulnerabilities exist in non-unionized workplaces. They demanded that the Daejeon Regional Labor Office conduct comprehensive investigations into Hansol Paper's violations of labor standards and industrial safety laws, and that prosecutors charge the actual business executives under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act. The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions also called for 'fundamental changes in corporate culture' to prevent further worker fatalities, emphasizing that this tragedy represents systemic failures rather than isolated incidents.

Systemic Issues in Korean Industrial Safety

This tragic incident highlights broader problems in South Korea's industrial safety landscape, particularly regarding the treatment of new employees and the effectiveness of safety training programs. Mr. A, who had only been employed for one month, represents the vulnerability of new workers who may not be fully familiar with all safety protocols and potential hazards. The fact that his disappearance went unnoticed for an entire shift points to systemic issues in employee monitoring and workplace safety culture.

The case has drawn attention to the gap between South Korea's advanced industrial capacity and its workplace safety standards. Despite being home to major global corporations, incidents like this reveal that basic safety measures are often inadequate or improperly implemented. The government's characterization of this as a 'backward country-type accident' occurring in a major corporation underscores the disconnect between Korea's economic development and its workplace safety practices. Labor experts argue that this incident should serve as a wake-up call for comprehensive reform of industrial safety regulations and corporate accountability measures.

Lessons for International Observers

For international observers, this incident provides important insights into the challenges facing South Korea's industrial sector and the ongoing struggle to balance economic efficiency with worker safety. The case demonstrates how even established corporations in developed countries can fail catastrophically in their duty of care to employees. The delayed discovery of the accident, the inadequate safety measures, and the company's poor emergency response protocols offer sobering lessons about corporate responsibility and the need for robust regulatory oversight.

The application of South Korea's Serious Accidents Punishment Act in this case will be closely watched as a test of the law's effectiveness in holding corporate executives accountable for workplace fatalities. The outcome of this investigation may influence similar legislation in other countries and demonstrate whether legal frameworks can effectively deter corporate negligence in workplace safety matters. As South Korea continues to grapple with industrial safety challenges, this tragic case serves as a stark reminder that technological advancement must be accompanied by equally advanced safety cultures and practices.