South Korea Plans Exam Question Trading Penalties as Suneung Scandals Shake Trust

Ministry Seeks Clear Penalties for Trading Exam Questions

South Korea's Ministry of Education plans to amend the Private Teaching Institute Act after prosecutors indicted 46 private academy instructors over allegations that they bought exam questions from current teachers. Among those charged are prominent lecturers Hyun Woo-jin and Cho Jung-shik, who allegedly paid a teacher 420 million won and 83 million won respectively for questions.

As of January 22, 2026, the ministry aims to propose specific amendments within the year. Its goal is to give authorities explicit legal grounds to punish private academies and instructors involved in buying and selling test questions, closing a gap in the rules governing the private education industry.

The education minister can already suspend an academy's operations, close a business or impose fines for violations such as false advertising and operating without registration. The law, however, contains no explicit provision setting out sanctions specifically for trading exam questions. That gap has complicated efforts to penalize the alleged cash for questions networks.

The investigation reaches into the preparation system surrounding the College Scholastic Ability Test, commonly called the Suneung. The annual standardized examination carries enormous weight in university admissions and can influence career opportunities and social standing. Allegations that money can buy access to questions have deepened anxiety about whether students compete fairly.

The proposed law is one part of a wider response. Authorities also face findings from the Board of Audit and Inspection, demands for compensation over a disputed English question, criticism of exam difficulty and new cases of students using artificial intelligence to complete assessments. Together, these controversies put pressure on both the security of exam materials and the way schools measure learning.

What Are the Star Lecturers Accused Of?

Prosecutors accuse the 46 private academy instructors of obtaining questions from current teachers for use in their teaching materials. Hyun allegedly paid 420 million won, while Cho allegedly paid 83 million won, in exchange for questions from mock college entrance examinations and school tests.

Prosecutors also indicted education company Hyconsi and the Gangnam Daesung Institute on charges involving the trading of exam questions with teachers between 2020 and 2023. The allegations cover businesses as well as individual instructors, placing the commercial market for exam preparation at the center of the case.

Private academies have a powerful financial incentive to secure material that helps students score highly. Strong results can attract new enrollments, support expensive tuition fees and build the reputation of a star lecturer. Access to questions before an assessment can turn that competition for customers into an unfair advantage for paying students.

Mock examinations matter because they help students prepare for the Suneung and compare their performance with others. When some students have already encountered questions, the resulting rankings become distorted. Families able to pay for access to the instructors involved may gain an advantage over students relying on ordinary classroom teaching and honest preparation.

An Audit Described a Wider Network

The Board of Audit and Inspection previously uncovered allegations of collusion between high school teachers and private education companies. The state watchdog described an illicit organization established to pass exam questions to private education businesses in exchange for money ahead of the annual Suneung.

The board requested a police investigation into 56 people, including current public high school teachers and officials suspected of violating laws concerning prohibited solicitation, obstruction of duty and embezzlement. Those identified included 27 current teachers, a university professor, four employees of the Korean Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation and 23 people associated with private academies. The institute administers the Suneung.

One case involved a teacher who allegedly recruited eight colleagues into a question trading ring. The teacher had served on Suneung review committees and allegedly supplied more than 2,000 mock exam questions reflecting Suneung trends to private academies and well known instructors between 2019 and May 2023.

The alleged organizer received more than US$500,000, distributed a substantial portion to participating teachers and retained a substantial amount personally. The audit findings widened concern from individual transactions to organized relationships between people working inside schools and businesses selling exam preparation.

Why English Question 23 Became a Flashpoint

The controversy surrounding English question 23 on the 2022 Suneung brought those concerns into sharp focus. A passage in a mock exam book produced by a renowned instructor appeared word for word on the actual examination. The Korean Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation called the duplication a coincidence, while the state auditor said it had concrete evidence of a leak.

The incident involved a university professor who supervised an educational broadcast connected to the Suneung. He included a question based on a passage from a book by Harvard University Professor Cass Sunstein. A high school teacher appointed to set English questions had provided the passage.

The same passage appeared on the Suneung two months later. The auditor said the handling of the material violated security rules governing educational broadcasts and criticized the institute for failing to prevent the duplication.

The institute also faced criticism for leaving the incident out of its report on the Suneung complaints process, even though it generated 60% of all complaints. The dispute therefore concerned both how the passage reached students before the examination and how the responsible institution handled objections afterward.

How the Allegations Developed

The transactions and disputed exam material span several years. The dates show how the allegations concerning teachers, academies and examination oversight connect:

• From 2019 to May 2023, a teacher who had served on Suneung review committees allegedly supplied more than 2,000 mock exam questions through a network involving eight colleagues.
• Between 2020 and 2023, Hyconsi and the Gangnam Daesung Institute allegedly traded exam questions with teachers.
• In the 2022 Suneung controversy, a passage used in preparation material appeared on the actual examination two months later.
• As of January 22, 2026, the Ministry of Education plans to propose amendments to the Private Teaching Institute Act within the year.

The government has also pledged changes beginning with the June mock examinations to prevent overlap between Suneung questions and private mock exam material. Its response addresses both the people trading questions and the procedures intended to keep examination content secure.

Why One Examination Carries So Much Weight

More than 500,000 students register for the Suneung each year. The examination is widely regarded as a gateway to leading universities, economic security and social mobility. Its perceived influence can extend even to marriage prospects, helping explain the intense pressure on students and their families.

South Korea changes its daily routine to accommodate the test. Flights are temporarily halted during the English listening section to keep the surroundings quiet. The stock market opens an hour later, while banks and public offices delay their start times to reduce traffic congestion.

Police officers rushing late students to examination halls have become a familiar sight in annual videos. Parents visit churches and Buddhist temples to pray for their children. Some students avoid seaweed soup because of a superstition that its slippery strands might cause them to slip up during the test.

These practices reflect how deeply the examination reaches into family life. When students believe a single day's performance can shape their future, any promise of an advantage becomes valuable. Allegations that teachers sold questions strike directly at the expectation that every candidate should face the same assessment under fair conditions.

Difficult Questions Bring Another Crisis

The Suneung is an examination marathon lasting eight hours, covering Korean, mathematics, English, social sciences and natural sciences. Its reputation for extreme difficulty adds to the demand for intensive preparation and any advantage that academies can provide.

The English section has drawn particular criticism. Students have described some questions as "insane" or compared answering them to deciphering an ancient script. Critics argue that certain items test a student's ability to navigate logic tricks more than their ability to understand and use English.

One question asked students to insert a sentence into a paragraph about the philosophy of video game avatars. Another presented a complex argument about Immanuel Kant's philosophy of law. Passages drawn from academic books can become especially difficult when removed from the surrounding explanation.

The controversy over difficulty led Oh Seung-geol, the chief official responsible for administering the Suneung, to resign. He accepted responsibility for the "chaos" caused by the examination.

When Preparation Becomes Learning the Tricks

Jung Chae-kwan, an English language professor and former official at the institution administering the Suneung, described how confusing passages affect classroom teaching:

"The texts are not necessarily impossible, but they are maddeningly confusing. It is a pain because it makes the material useless for actual education," said Jung Chae-kwan, an English language professor and former official at the institution that administers the Suneung.

Jung said teachers often end up drilling "test-taking hacks" instead of teaching English. Students who know the tricks can sometimes select the correct answer without fully reading or understanding a passage.

For students, that changes the task from learning a language to mastering the examination's patterns. For private academies, it creates a market for specialized preparation and material that appears to anticipate what exam setters will ask. In an environment of intense competition, the demand for an edge can extend to illegal transactions.

The criticism of difficult questions and the allegations of question trading place different demands on education authorities. Exam designers face pressure to produce useful assessments of learning, while regulators and investigators face pressure to protect confidential material and punish improper exchanges.

AI Cheating Adds Pressure Inside Schools

A recent case at a Seoul high school exposed another challenge to fair assessment. During a Korean language assignment, a teacher noticed students opening unauthorized pages on their tablet computers.

The school reviewed access logs and found that several answers had grown unusually quickly, with substantial text appearing in under a minute. Students admitted copying answers produced by artificial intelligence or pasting content prepared beforehand.

The school invalidated the assessment for all students and held a retest on paper. The decision aimed to restore fairness across the class after unauthorized assistance had affected the original exercise.

Similar incidents have occurred at universities, including Yonsei University and Seoul National University. Those cases involved students using AI tools during online examinations or submitting code generated by AI. The cases extend concerns about assessment integrity beyond private academies and the Suneung.

Schools Need Rules as AI Teaching Expands

The Ministry of Education is promoting students' ability to use artificial intelligence, even as schools confront unauthorized use in assessed work. That leaves educators managing both the benefits of learning to use new tools and the need to judge what students can do themselves.

Calls for clear usage standards and ethics education focus on helping students use AI with critical thinking. Schools need to decide when assistance is allowed and when an assignment must reflect a student's independent work.

The Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education is preparing guidelines on AI use and aims to distribute them before the next academic year. The Seoul high school case shows why those rules matter in daily teaching: a digital assignment can quickly become difficult to assess fairly when students use outside tools without permission.

Apology Demands and a Compensation Claim

The Presidential Office has expressed concern about damage to fairness in university admissions. At a meeting of senior presidential aides, presidential chief of staff Kang Hoon-sik called on education authorities to acknowledge the effect on students:

"The foundation of a fair Republic of Korea is an admissions system free from cheating. Education authorities owe students a sincere reflection and apology for the sense of futility and disillusionment they may have experienced," said Kang Hoon-sik during a meeting of senior presidential aides.

More than 100 organizations, including the Anti-Education Cartel Special Investigation Citizens' Committee, announced plans to file a compensation lawsuit over the English question 23 controversy. They seek damages equivalent to US$15,000 per person on behalf of nearly 445,000 students, for an estimated total of US$6.6 billion.

Professor Yang Jeong-ho, chairman of the committee, said describing the leaking or predicting of questions as a coincidence was unfair and deeply disappointing. The proposed claim puts a financial demand alongside the calls for institutional accountability.

The Ministry of Education also plans to extend the deadline for disciplinary action against teachers involved in exam irregularities from three years to 10 years. That would give authorities seven additional years to pursue professional discipline. Alongside the planned academy law amendment and changes starting with the June mock examinations, the measure forms the government's response to misconduct that may take years to uncover.

Key Points

• The Ministry of Education plans to propose amendments to the Private Teaching Institute Act within 2026, creating explicit grounds to punish trading in exam questions.
• Prosecutors indicted 46 private academy instructors, including Hyun Woo-jin and Cho Jung-shik, who allegedly paid 420 million won and 83 million won respectively for questions.
• The state auditor requested a police investigation into 56 people and described a teacher network that allegedly supplied more than 2,000 mock exam questions.
• The auditor challenged the exam institute's explanation that the duplicated passage in English question 23 was a coincidence.
• Oh Seung-geol resigned amid criticism of examination difficulty, while schools and universities also face cases involving unauthorized AI use.
• More than 100 organizations announced a planned compensation lawsuit seeking an estimated US$6.6 billion for nearly 445,000 students.
• The government plans to extend the teacher disciplinary deadline from three years to 10 years and introduce measures against question overlap beginning with the June mock examinations.