According to Yonhap News Agency, on September 26, local time, the South Korean National Assembly passed the amendment to the Political Organization Law with 174 votes in favor, 1 vote against and 5 abstentions.

The main content of this bill is the abolition of the Prosecutor¡¯s Office, which has existed for 78 years.The new Public Prosecution Office and the Major Crime Investigation Office (Re-adjustment Office) will be set up, and the public prosecution and investigation powers of the procuratorate will be completely separated.

This major reform not only shook the Korean judicial system, but also caused heated debate in the political arena.

Since its establishment in 1948, the Prosecutor¡¯s Office of South Korea has been the core body of the judicial system, with a dual function of the right to investigate and the right to prosecute.

The procuratorate implements a "separate office" system within the procuratorate. Each procurator has independent decision-making power, and the superior can only make suggestions, but cannot intervene in specific cases.

In addition, the procuratorate also has the right to command the police investigation through the "procuratorial guidance investigation system". This highly concentrated power makes the prosecutor's office play a special role in Korean politics, and it is even called an institution with "unlimited power".

However, this concentration of power has also caused controversy and problems.From Yongxiang to Yongxiang, former South Korean presidents have suffered investigations by prosecutors, many of whom have been sentenced to imprisonment.

Park geun-hye was sentenced for "cronies meddling in politics", Lee Myung-bak was imprisoned for corruption, and Moon Jae in's son-in-law Xu was also investigated for his position.

The powerful power of the prosecutor's office makes it an important tool of political struggle, and it also makes Korean society question its judicial independence.

The adoption of the amendment means that the South Korean judiciary system will undergo major adjustments.

According to the bill, the Prosecutor¡¯s Office will be abolished and replaced by the Prosecutor¡¯s Office of the Ministry of Justice and the Major Crime Investigation Office of the Ministry of Administrative Security.

The Public Prosecution Office is responsible for initiating public prosecutions, while the Major Crime Investigation Office focuses on the investigation of major cases. This reform realizes the complete separation of investigation power and public prosecution power, and weakens the power of the procuratorate institutionally.

In recent years, Li has been investigated by the Prosecutor¡¯s Office in five cases, including real estate development misconduct and misuse of the government funds, while Li has also been involved in the case of his son-in-law Xu.

The reform is considered to be an initiative by Lee in Ming to try to reduce himself and his political allies to the future risk of judicial liquidation, however, this reform has also been strongly opposed in the largest opposition National Power Party.

Members of the National Forces parliament collectively withdrew from the vote, protesting the bill "undermining the independence of the judiciary" and accusing it of being a tool for "providing judicial immunity to leftist leaders."

Not only that, the prosecutor¡¯s system has also reacted fiercely, with some prosecutors resigning to express dissatisfaction.

South Korean citizens also have a different attitude toward the reform, according to Gallup¡¯s latest poll, which shows that 52% of respondents support the separation between investigation and prosecution, but 38% are concerned that the reform could bring new problems, such as difficulties in coordination between new institutions or inefficiency.

From an international perspective, the South Korean Prosecutor¡¯s Office¡¯s power is not commonly concentrated globally. In many countries (such as the United States) the judicial system has long been separated from the prosecution system. Li¡¯s reform has tried to move closer to the international pattern, but whether it can truly optimize the South Korean judicial system still needs time to be tested.