2026 Legal Showdown: Jo Jung-sik’s Defense Against Exam Question Trading Charges Revealed

Jo Jeong-sik / Photo=DB

[Sports Today reporter Kim Tae-hyung] Star instructor Jo Jeong-sik, accused of illicit trading in College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) questions, denied the charges at his trial.

On the 3rd, Yonhap reported that Judge Park Kang-gyun of the Seoul Central District Court’s Criminal Division 4 convened the first pretrial hearing in the morning on allegations that Jo violated the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act and committed breach of trust in the course of business.

Prosecutors allege Jo conspired with A, an employee of the company that produces his instructional materials, to obtain questions from two active teachers between January 2021 and October 2022. They say he paid roughly 83.5 million KRW over 67 transactions (approximately 62,625 USD).

Prosecutors also allege he instructed A to procure English-language exam questions from current teachers for use in his classes.

The two teachers accused of receiving payments from Jo were also indicted under the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act. Jo’s defense denied the charges, arguing the transactions reflected market rates and amounted to legitimate private deals under the statute. They maintained that Jo did not receive the kind of money or gifts the law prohibits.

Others charged in the case likewise denied wrongdoing, saying the payments they exchanged were private transactions not covered by the statute.

The Improper Solicitation and Graft Act bars public officials from accepting more than 1 million KRW (approximately 750 USD) at one time or more than 3 million KRW (approximately 2,250 USD) per fiscal year from the same person in connection with their duties. The law, however, exempts goods or payments provided under legitimate private transactions (excluding gifts), such as to satisfy a debt.

The court asked prosecutors to clarify the purpose, content and scope of Article 8(3)(3) of the Act — specifically the prosecution’s theory of the indictment and its interpretation. The court said a normative legal analysis is necessary to define what constitutes a \”private transaction with legitimate basis.\”

The court scheduled another pretrial hearing for May 22 to organize the parties’ positions on evidence and related arguments.

[Sports Today reporter Kim Tae-hyung ent@stoo.com]
「The closest coverage, the most ‘FunFun’ news ⓒ Sports Today」