This article was displayed on the ChosunBiz RM Report website at 3:29 p.m. on Dec. 16, 2025.
A criminal trial of former employees of Hyundai Motor and Kia, indicted over the decade-old controversy surrounding the "Theta II engine defect" and alleged "delayed recall," is expected to resume after four years. Hyundai Motor and Kia had petitioned for a constitutional review, arguing that the phrase "without delay" in the Motor Vehicle Management Act, which underpinned the prosecution's indictment, is vague, but the Constitutional Court found that the meaning of the provision is clear.
According to legal sources on the 16th, the Constitutional Court on Nov. 27 unanimously upheld, with a 9-0 opinion, the constitutionality of Articles 31 and 78 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act and related provisions, rejecting Hyundai Motor and Kia's claim of unconstitutionality.
◇ In the U.S., a 2015 recall; in Korea, a 2017 recall
The case erupted in the United States in 2015. At the time, some vehicles, including the Sonata equipped with the Theta II GDi engine, were reported to experience engine stalling while driving, noise and vibration, and potential fire risk. The Theta II engine is a 2.0–2.4-liter (L) gasoline direct-injection engine independently developed by Hyundai Motor.
Hyundai Motor Group recalled about 470,000 vehicles in September of the same year, citing issues in the connecting rod assembly process within the cylinder of engines assembled at its U.S. plant. However, allegations later emerged that similar defects occurred in the same family of engines produced domestically.
In Aug. 2016, a Hyundai Motor insider filed a public-interest report with the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and U.S. authorities, and the ministry began a defect investigation in Oct. of the same year. Hyundai Motor then conducted a recall in Apr. 2017 for about 170,000 vehicles equipped with the Theta II engine in Korea. During this process, controversy arose over an alleged "delayed recall," with claims that the company recognized the engine defect but did not disclose it until authorities began investigating. The ministry referred Hyundai Motor to prosecutors for investigation in May of the same year.
In July 2019, prosecutors indicted the corporate entities of Hyundai Motor and Kia, along with three former executives — former quality chief vice chairman Shin Jong-woon, former head of the quality division Bang Chang-seop, and former head of the quality strategy office Lee Seung-won — on charges of violating the Motor Vehicle Management Act. Prosecutors concluded that Hyundai Motor and Kia delayed recalling vehicles by concealing known defects in the Theta II engine installed in the Sonata, Grandeur, K5 and other models.
◇ Claim of "excessive criminal punishment"… Constitutional Court says "not unreasonable"
Prosecutors argued that Hyundai Motor and Kia violated the recall obligations under the Motor Vehicle Management Act. Article 31 of the same law requires automakers to disclose and take corrective measures "without delay" upon learning of a defect. Article 78 provides for imprisonment of up to 10 years or a fine of up to 100 million won for violations.
In June 2020, Hyundai Motor and Kia argued that the terms "defect" and "without delay" in the provision were unclear and violated the principle of clarity, and that criminal punishment was excessive for matters that could be sufficiently addressed through administrative sanctions such as fines. The Seoul Central District Court accepted this and referred the case to the Constitutional Court for review in Mar. 2021, after which the first trial over the alleged "delayed recall" was halted for more than four years.
The Constitutional Court, however, found that the disputed terms are sufficiently foreseeable. It said that a "defect that impedes safe operation" means a condition lacking ordinarily expected safety, and that "the date on which the fact became known" refers to the point when the manufacturer recognized the defect. It also stated that "without delay" can be interpreted to mean that, absent just cause, disclosure and corrective measures must be taken within a reasonable period.
In effect, the Constitutional Court did not accept Hyundai Motor and Kia's argument that the terminology is ambiguous. On the appropriateness of criminal punishment, the court also said, "It is not easy to see punishing the violation of corrective-action obligations as markedly unreasonable."
Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court's decision is also expected to lead to the resumption of the BMW Korea-related trial. In connection with the 2018 fires involving BMW diesel vehicles, BMW Korea was likewise indicted on charges of violating the Motor Vehicle Management Act and sought a constitutional review on the same grounds, but the Constitutional Court did not accept the petition. A court official said, "With the Constitutional Court's decision issued, the panels in charge of both cases will review whether to resume the trials."