Korea bans preschool entrance exams with fines topping out at 3 million won

The decree does not ban assessment; it bans assessment before enrollment. Observation and interviews during instruction stay legal once a child has enrolled at an academy or teaching center, or once tutoring has begun ^[7]. Before that happens, the academy has to tell guardians the purpose and method of the review and the educational support that will follow, and obtain consent in writing or electronically ^[8]. The findings may describe learning progress or areas needing support. They may not show a score, a ranking or a pass-or-fail result ^[9].

A first violation costs 1 million won, a second 2 million and a third 3 million ^[12]. An academy that runs banned recruitment or placement tests through three enforcement actions pays 6 million won in total ^[15], rising by 1 million won each time ^[16]. The amounts are absolute sums with no enrollment or fee term in them, so a single tutor and a branch of a large chain face the same 1 million won on the first offense ^[17]. Rewards may also be paid, within budget limits, to people who report violations ^[13].

Education Minister Choi Kyo-jin said the revision "has laid the groundwork for blocking extreme forms of private education for infants and young children, such as the age-4 and age-7 exams, and for moving toward a society where young children can grow up in good health" ^[14].

The quieter clause is the one that creates a list. From October 1 preschoolers fall within the scope of extracurricular instruction under the private academy law. Private tutors and teaching centers that instruct them must report to their local education office ^[10]. The ministry said it plans to provide guidance on reporting procedures to reduce confusion in the field ^[11]. Nine days separate the Cabinet's approval from the date the law takes effect ^[18].

In my view the reporting duty constrains this sector harder than the testing ban does. A ban needs a witness; a register needs only a form. The ministry's announcement does not include a count of the academies or tutors that ran these exams.

There are readings that go the other way. If the coming guidance treats a free pre-enrollment consultation as an interview-style test, the ban reaches the recruitment funnel directly. The 1 million won first offense then becomes a real operating risk for a chain that screens hundreds of applicants ^[5][12]. If it does not, an academy can enroll first, obtain written consent, and sort children by a described learning level that is not scored ^[8][9]. And demand can move to one-on-one tutoring, where the reporting duty now applies ^[10].

What would show me wrong: repeat violations appearing in education office records, which would mean the fine schedule is reaching operators who never registered in the first place.