On September 6, 2025, South Korea found itself at the center of a heated political and public debate, as two high-profile controversies involving key figures in the nation’s education and broadcasting sectors unfolded in rapid succession. The events, which have gripped both the public and political parties, concern allegations of corruption, misuse of authority, and the persistent challenge of maintaining public trust in government appointments.
At the heart of the first scandal is Lee Jin-sook, the current chair of the Korea Communications Commission and former president of Daejeon MBC. According to eToday, Lee was summoned for the fourth time by the Daejeon Yuseong Police on September 6, 2025, as part of an ongoing investigation into allegations that she misused a corporate card for personal expenses during her tenure at MBC from March 2015 to January 2018. The investigation, which began after a formal complaint by members of the National Assembly’s Science, ICT, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee in July of the previous year, has seen Lee repeatedly deny any wrongdoing.
“There is a political motive behind this investigation,” Lee asserted during her initial questioning, as reported by eToday. “I have never used the corporate card for personal purposes.” She reiterated this stance at a full committee meeting of the National Assembly’s Science, ICT, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee on September 2, stating, “I did not use the corporate card for personal reasons; it was for business purposes only.”
Despite her denials, police investigations have uncovered evidence that the corporate card was used repeatedly for about a month and a week following the first summons. The case has drawn significant public attention, with conservative groups gathering outside the police station on the day of her fourth summons to protest what they perceive as a politically motivated probe. The controversy has not only put Lee’s career under scrutiny but has also reignited debates about the standards of public service and the role of political influence in investigations.
Meanwhile, the education sector is facing its own crisis. The nomination of Choi Kyo-jin as the new Minister of Education, following the fall of previous candidate Lee Jin-sook, has sparked fierce debate across political lines. The opposition has labeled Choi’s nomination “an insult to education and the public,” citing a series of controversies including a past DUI, conspiracy theories regarding the Cheonan incident, and other ethical concerns. According to Dailyan, Choi faced intense questioning during his confirmation hearing on September 2, admitting, “I was lacking. I regret it. I apologize.”
The ruling People Power Party (PPP) has criticized Choi’s nomination on moral grounds, arguing that appointing someone with a record of drunk driving sends the wrong message about educational leadership. “You said you have educated future generations, but is this educational?” PPP lawmaker Seo Ji-young challenged during the hearing. In response, Democratic Party lawmaker Baek Seung-ah countered by referencing a previous education minister who had a higher blood alcohol level during her own DUI incident, suggesting that the current controversy is being exaggerated for political gain.
The back-and-forth has highlighted the persistent issue of personnel scandals in South Korean politics, a problem that has plagued administrations regardless of party. The Democratic Party, which had previously lambasted the Yoon Suk-yeol administration for similar missteps, now finds itself defending its own choices. “Personnel issues have been a chronic problem in every administration,” observed one analyst, noting that six high-ranking officials resigned within the first hundred days of the Yoon government, a fact that the Democratic Party once used as ammunition but now seeks to downplay.
Public sentiment, as always, remains a key factor. The Choi nomination has become a bellwether for the administration’s standing, with some warning that pushing through the appointment could further erode trust. “If the president insists on the appointment, it will only add to the administration’s burdens,” a member of the PPP leadership told Dailyan. “The public is watching, and perceptions are changing for the worse.”
The Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations (KFTA) added its voice to the debate on September 5, issuing a statement expressing “serious concerns” about Choi’s appointment and urging President Lee Jae-myung to reconsider. While the administration’s approval ratings have recently improved thanks to successful diplomatic summits, the ongoing personnel controversies threaten to reverse those gains.
The Democratic Party has tried to shift the narrative, arguing that Choi has apologized sufficiently and that the PPP’s opposition is an attempt to obstruct government operations at the expense of the country’s education system. “Choi has explained and apologized multiple times to the public,” read a joint statement from Democratic and Progressive Party members of the National Assembly’s Education Committee. “The PPP seems uninterested in policy competence and is only interested in political strife, refusing to accept a sincere apology.”
Yet, the opposition remains unconvinced. The PPP points to the fact that four cabinet nominees have already fallen since the administration began, arguing that the repeated scandals point to deeper flaws in the personnel vetting system. “If these problems continue, public trust will inevitably decline,” one opposition lawmaker warned, suggesting that future appointments will be judged not by personal connections but by their impact on approval ratings.
Commentators have also questioned the wisdom of nominating individuals with controversial pasts to sensitive positions like the Ministry of Education. “Recommending someone with a history of drunk driving, plagiarism, and even slapping a female student as minister of education is simply incomprehensible,” said Jang Sung-chul, head of the Public Forum Center. “The Democratic Party should consider whether appointing Choi is truly in the administration’s best interest, especially since it risks resembling the very government it once criticized.”
These scandals underscore the challenges of governance in South Korea, where public trust is fragile and the margin for error is slim. As investigations continue and political tempers flare, both the broadcasting and education sectors remain under a cloud of suspicion. For now, the nation waits to see whether its leaders can restore confidence—or whether the cycle of controversy will continue to erode the foundations of public service.
In the end, the stakes are clear: the credibility of South Korea’s institutions and the integrity of its leaders are on the line, with every decision scrutinized by a vigilant public and an ever-watchful opposition.
