The office of the South Korean president, known as the Blue House, is reviewing the possibility of reinstating the Judicial Examination (Sasi), which had been abolished in 2017 along with the establishment of law schools. This potential revival has triggered a heated debate within the legal community, revolving around the efficacy and purpose of law schools introduced in 2009 to reform the legal profession. The law school system aimed to produce diverse legal professionals and decrease the reliance on the traditional examination system, but criticisms persist regarding its high tuition fees and perceived societal stratification, reminiscent of historical class privilege.

Legal experts, including Professor Wang Sang-han from Sogang University, have voiced support for the revival of the Sasi as a means to address the high barriers to entry in the legal profession created by law schools. Wang argues that the current legal education system has inadvertently formed a 'legal cartel,' contrary to its original intention, and that reviving the Sasi could provide more equitable opportunities for aspiring lawyers. Conversely, opponents warn that reintroducing the examination may exacerbate existing hierarchies within the profession and favor only prestigious institutions in Seoul, jeopardizing the survival of regional law schools and aggravating regional disparities in legal education.

The discourse surrounding the potential reinstatement of the Judicial Examination touches upon deeper issues of access and equity in legal education, with stakeholders divided on whether it would mitigate or worsen the current challenges faced by aspiring legal professionals in South Korea. The debate continues as voices from both sides present compelling arguments, reflecting broader societal concerns over educational equality and the functioning of the legal system.