[Law & Story] The Era of Judges and Prosecutors Under Siege

Status Shaken by Prosecution Reform
Judiciary Faces Pressure and Identity Crisis
Loss to Society as Top Talent Avoids Judicial Careers

Seokjin Choi, Law & Biz Specialist

The status of judges and prosecutors continues to decline.

The phrase "Grow up to become a judge or prosecutor," once seen as a symbol of success, is now something you only hear in period dramas. In spouse occupation preference surveys conducted by matchmaking agencies, judges and prosecutors have long been surpassed by doctors. There are even reports that top law firm attorneys at places like Kim & Chang or Bae, Kim & Lee are now more popular than judges or prosecutors.

The decline of prosecutors is not a recent phenomenon. After former President Moon Jae-in, who took office in 2017, established the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials and adjusted investigative powers between the police and prosecution, prosecutors' investigative authority was gradually reduced. There was a brief sign of recovery when former Prosecutor General Yoon Suk-yeol became president, but with his impeachment following an unjustified declaration of martial law, prosecutorial powers are now on the verge of disappearing altogether.

With the impending abolition of the prosecution service, prosecutors now face a binary choice: either remain as public prosecutors, only able to indict but not investigate, or drop the prosecutor title and move to the Serious Crimes Investigation Office as investigators. Watching the political debate over whether to grant public prosecutors any supplementary investigative powers, or to introduce judicial officers distinct from investigators at the Serious Crimes Investigation Office, prosecutors are left feeling a deep sense of frustration.

Although judges are not facing the complete dissolution of their organization like prosecutors, their situation is equally dire. Prosecutors, who have been subjected to constant criticism and a gradual reduction in authority over several years, may have developed some resilience. In contrast, judges, who have enjoyed respect and esteem for decades on the bench, are now facing a series of humiliating events over the past one or two years that must feel both unfamiliar and difficult to endure.

The ruling party, dissatisfied with court rulings, is threatening the judiciary by proposing to massively increase the number of Supreme Court justices, attempting to summon the Chief Justice as a witness at the National Assembly audit, and even introducing a bill to create a new crime of "distortion of law," which would criminalize the application of statutes in court decisions.

It doesn't stop there. Depending on the outcome of politically sensitive cases, it has become routine for judges to be portrayed as either heroes or villains. For example, among the judges presiding over trials related to the "12·3 Martial Law Declaration," those who deliver verdicts that the Democratic Party finds satisfactory may be promoted in future personnel decisions, while those who do not may be demoted.

This scenario is entirely predictable, considering the two previous rounds of senior prosecutor appointments. Seven chief prosecutors were demoted to the Legal Research and Training Institute simply for signing a statement requesting an explanation of the circumstances and legal basis for the acting prosecutor general's order to withdraw the appeal in the Daejang-dong case. This demonstrates that, regardless of the constitutional and statutory guarantees of status for judges and prosecutors, anyone who falls out of favor with the administration or ruling party can be dismissed in an instant.

Alongside the issue of the "politicization of the judiciary," there is growing concern that the number of outstanding candidates applying to become judges and prosecutors is sharply declining.

The percentage of newly appointed judges from SKY universities, which exceeded 80% in 2014, fell to the 60% range in 2023. Among new prosecutors from SKY law schools, the proportion dropped from 57.5% in 2014 to 25.6% in 2024-a decrease of 31.9 percentage points over ten years. In contrast, this year, 157 out of 200 new attorneys (78.5%) at the top six law firms are graduates of SKY law schools.

While the requirement for legal experience to be appointed as a judge may be a factor, the more decisive reasons seem to be the relatively low salary compared to large corporations or law firms, the overwhelming workload that leads to a backlog of unresolved cases unless one works overtime, and the gradual disappearance of the self-esteem, social status, respect, and esteem that once sustained judges and prosecutors.

Just like doctors, who deal with matters of life and death, judges-who serve as the final arbiters of all conflicts and disputes and, in some cases, can even sentence individuals to complete deprivation of life or liberty-and prosecutors, who are responsible for protecting the public from crime and safeguarding suspects' rights, play crucial roles in our society.

Unfortunately, however, South Korea is becoming a society where it is increasingly difficult to expect dedicated judges and prosecutors who work late into the night, reviewing case files out of a sense of mission and justice to serve the public good.