The Prosecutors' Office released self-reform measures after a string of corrupt prosecutors were involved in alleged bribery to prevent similar incidents, but they have not been effective. Experts claim that the problem lies not in the morality of the individual prosecutor, but in the absolute power enjoyed by the prosecutors. Prosecutors of the Republic of Korea have the right to not indict a person even when a crime has been committed, and at the same time, they also have exclusive rights to indict a person. So among businessmen, the practice of taking out a "prosecutor's insurance" continues.

Kim (46), a chief prosecutor who allegedly received bribes, is one of them. Inside and outside the Prosecutors' Office, people appear to think that what was bound to happen finally did after the "sponsor" culture, which had secretly continued, was revealed. A lawyer who was formerly a senior prosecutor said, "Twenty years ago, the owner of a shipping business or a construction company would stand by a successful prosecutor as a sponsor. It is deplorable how such vices from twenty years back have continued to this day."

The case of chief prosecutor Kim, who had his high school alumnus and business owner as a sponsor, and the case of former director of the Prosecutors' Office Jin Kyung-joon and his "bribery stocks" are identical cases. Kim, who was transferred to the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, received 15 million won from his high school alumnus Kim, who was also the CEO of the company, A. The chief prosecutor was allegedly treated to drinks and entertainment costing millions of won two to three times a month. Jin also received stocks valued at 850 million won from the CEO of NXC, Kim Jung-ju, who was also a college alumnus of Jin, and also received a car, Genesis, costing 49 million won.

Public Prosecutor General Kim Soo-nam (57) ordered a thorough investigation this time, just as he had done with the investigation of Jin. In connection to chief prosecutor Kim, the prosecutor general said, "The public prosecutor general will thoroughly investigate all alleged irregularities and strictly hold those who have misbehaved responsible." They will send four people from Inspection Department 1 at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office inspection headquarters and quickly conclude this case.

However, such empty words do not earn the people's trust. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office simply put the Western District Prosecutors' Office in charge even after they received a report of Kim's irregularities last May. At the time, the Criminal Department 1 at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office was carrying out an investigation of chief prosecutor Jin on charges of receiving stocks as bribes. The Prosecutors' Office explained, "We put the Western District Prosecutors' Office in charge to handle matters efficiently," but such an explanation turned out to be meaningless when the prosecutors belatedly gathered a special inspection team. This is why people are criticizing that the Prosecutors' Office is busy handling cases known to the outside world rather than focusing on self-reforms.

On August 31, the Prosecutors' Office Reform Team at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office suggested establishing a special inspection team to oversee irregularities among senior prosecutors and introducing an inspection system involving a specially appointed prosecutor to prevent "sponsored" prosecutors. However, in less than a week, chief prosecutor Kim was involved in allegations of having a sponsor, raising questions on the effectiveness of such proposed measures.

Many believe it will be difficult to eradicate sponsored prosecutors with determination and harsh punishment alone. The reason people provide gifts and entertainment to the prosecutors is because they have powerful authority that knows no precedent. The judicial circle points out that the prosecutors should acknowledge the limits of their own reforms, which they promised just a week ago, and that outside forces need to carry out reforms to subtract the power of the Prosecutors' Office.

At the time of the 2012 presidential election, there were discussions on the introduction of a permanent special prosecutor and the establishment of a special agency overseeing irregularities among senior public officials, but they were never implemented. Last year, a special inspector general system was newly put in place, but the inspector general has no authority to carry out a forced investigation, because the prosecutors argued to protect their sole right to indict criminals. This turned the new position more into an empty shell. Ha Tae-hun, joint leader of the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy said, "In order to keep the Prosecutors' Office in check, when they can arbitrarily handle cases, we need to establish an agency overseeing the irregularities of senior public officials and strengthen policies such as the application for adjudication, which allows the court to compensate for the prosecutors' wrong decision not to prosecute a criminal."