This article was posted on the ChosunBiz MoneyMove site at 5:21 p.m. on Jan. 26, 2026.
The Construction Workers Mutual Aid Association (CW) has significantly tightened its standards for selecting and monitoring external managers for alternative investments. Private equity firms (PEFs) that have received severe disciplinary measures from supervisory authorities are excluded from investment, and related rules were revised so that funds can be recovered and contracts terminated even after a manager is contracted. The move is interpreted as a response to the MBK Partners–Homeplus Co. incident.
On the 26th, according to the investment banking industry, CW recently revised its internal guidelines on external managers for alternative investments. It directly reflected supervisory sanctions in the qualification requirements for managers and codified regulations so that practical sanctions, such as recovering investments, are possible if problems arise with a manager after selection.
When selecting external managers, CW excluded from consideration any managers who have received disciplinary measures of "institutional warning" or higher from financial authorities or other supervisory agencies within the past three years. If a manager's CEO or key investment personnel have received penalties of "salary reduction" or higher, they are also excluded from candidacy. This clearly makes severe disciplinary histories themselves a basis for exclusion from investment, beyond mere violations of laws and regulations. The criterion applies equally to blind funds and project fund investments.
Post-contract monitoring standards for external managers were also strengthened. If significant changes occur during management or violations of laws or regulations are confirmed, the association explicitly allows itself to take "appropriate measures." Appropriate measures include claims for damages, demands to replace the lead fund manager, fund recovery, contract termination, and prohibition on new fund allocations. This shifts away from a structure that relied on internal judgment or individual contract interpretation and clarifies the basis for sanctions at the guideline level.
Industry observers interpret the guideline revision as being mindful of the MBK Partners–Homeplus Co. incident. As criticism continued that supervisory sanctions against PEF managers are ineffective in actual investment structures, it is seen as significant that limited partners can directly restrict manager qualifications and have criteria to impose post hoc sanctions.
The industry says CW's move is considered strong even among domestic pension funds and mutual aid associations. It is rare to see a case that codifies supervisory sanction histories as exclusion criteria and allows fund recovery after selection. It is reported that the National Pension Service's internal standards for selecting and managing external managers provide for cancellation of selection or fund recovery if a manager receives severe disciplinary measures or higher from a supervisory agency.