Recent controversies surrounding high-profile suspects, including Harold Rogers, the interim CEO of Coupang, and former Seoul City Council member Kim Kyung, have sparked a debate within the police about the need to reform the current exit ban system, which is regulated by the prosecution. Currently, the procedure requires a 'review opinion' from prosecutors before exit bans can be implemented, which has led to complaints from police about obstacles to rapid investigations. This issue was highlighted when police attempted to impose an exit ban on Rogers, who returned to South Korea on September 21 for a major data leak investigation but faced repeated rejections from the prosecution due to an 'inappropriate' opinion regarding the ban.

The ongoing concern among police officials is that the current system slows down the investigation process. For instance, police expressed frustration over having to request exit bans only for them to be rejected after protracted waits, preventing timely engagement with suspects. Officers have pointed out the inefficiencies in the current system, which requires an opinion from the prosecution before an exit ban can be enforced on either South Korean citizens or foreigners in the country. In particular, the timing of requests and the weekend delays in prosecutor responses severely hinder the speed of investigations, compounding the urgency of the situation.

Despite calls for reform from within the police ranks, there is also considerable support for maintaining judicial oversight to prevent abuses of power. Some argue that while the prosecution's procedural involvement may hinder efficiency today, it is a critical safeguard against potential misuse of the exit ban powers by law enforcement. The discussions around these issues reflect deeper tensions between the imperative for swift criminal procedures and the necessary checks on police authority, raising broader questions about the balance of power in criminal justice processes in South Korea.