September 9, 2025
SEOUL – The government’s decision to curtail the power of South Korea’s prosecution is expected to not only bring structural reform, but also trigger a potential exodus of prosecutors from public service.
In a high-level meeting Sunday, the government, the presidential office and the ruling Democratic Party of Korea announced a major overhaul of public institutions, including splitting the prosecution service into two agencies: a crime investigation unit under the Interior Ministry and an indictment body under the Justice Ministry.
Under the plan, prosecutors must choose between the two new tracks. Those who want to stay on the investigative side would give up their powerful prosecutor title and serve as investigators under the Interior Ministry — a shift many in legal circles expect that prosecutors will be reluctant to accept.
“Many prosecutors are still likely to view the separation of investigation and prosecution as unfamiliar. And the idea of working as an investigator in the new agency under a different ministry can be even more unsettling,” said Lee Dong-heon, a former prosecutor now working as a lawyer.
“Transferring the prosecution’s existing investigative capabilities to the new investigation unit can bring more challenges than expected.”
The current administration is not the only one to pursue such a change. Previous administrations led by President Lee Jae Myung’s liberal predecessors, Moon Jae-in and the late Roh Moo-hyun, for years pushed for reform that would end prosecutors’ dual powers to investigate and indict, and signs of departures from the service have already begun to emerge.
According to data released by the Justice Ministry, the number of retired prosecutors, which had remained in the double digits until 2021, began to exceed 100 starting in 2022. A total of 132 prosecutors left the prosecution service in 2024.
In the appointment process for judges this year, 153 candidates reportedly passed the final review by the Judges Personnel Committee. Of them, 32 were former prosecutors, more than double last year’s figure of 14.
A former chief prosecutor, quoted by local outlet Ilyo Sisa, said many may leave the service if stripped of their authority, arguing that prosecutors without the power to both investigate and indict “have no reason to remain in the organization.”
Korean prosecutors have long wielded unrivaled power, holding both investigative and indictment authority — in a unique case among democracies.
Established under the 1985 Court Organization Act, their role expanded over the years to include prosecutorial supervision and the ability to demand specific sentences in court, withdraw public prosecution, terminate internal investigations, suspend execution of punishment and more. Liberal lawmakers have repeatedly called for reforms to curb their political influence and unchecked authority, most recently raising concerns over the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office allegedly destroying evidence in a case tied to former President Yoon Suk Yeol.
Acting Prosecutor General Noh Man-seok on Monday acknowledged that the push for reform stemmed from prosecutors’ own mistakes, but suggested that the agency make its case during a one-year grace period before the changes take full effect.
“As all of this stems from the faults of the prosecution, we deeply regret our actions and are reflecting on them,” Noh told reporters at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in southern Seoul.
He warned that the prosecution, defined in the Constitution, was now “at risk of being renamed by law,” and said he hoped the details of the reform would be crafted “from the perspective of the people.”
The ruling party aims to pass the reform bill by the end of September, with a provision granting prosecutors a one-year grace period.
Another former prosecutor, who requested anonymity, warned of possible investigation delays, pointing to previous cases after the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials was launched.
The agency, launched in 2021 by the Moon government to operate independently of the prosecution, has struggled with a shortage of prosecutors and has never met its staffing quota.
“This ultimately caused investigation delays and drew public criticism over incompetence,” the lawyer said. “If current prosecutors are reluctant to transfer to the Interior Ministry’s agency, investigative capabilities in key areas could be lost, causing public inconvenience.”
