Significance and Institutional Improvement of Anti-Corruption Investigation in Korea's Anti-Corruption Policy System

To prevent corruption, it is important to revise related laws and regulations for anti-corruption policy system improvement. However, in order to derive results of system improvement, a fact-finding survey or investigation must be conducted first to confirm the operation status and problems of the current system. Under current Act on the Prevention of Corruption and the Establishment and Management of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, surveys related to corruption prevention can be broadly classified into three categories: (1) investigation and evaluation of corruption in public institutions; (2) an explanation, request for data submission and fact-finding survey to establish and recommend policies and system improvements to prevent corruption in public institutions; (3) an investigation to verify details of reports of corruption. The fact-finding survey under Article 29 of the Act, which is the second type among the above, is a very important part of deriving institutional improvement plans to achieve anti-corruption policy results. In this paper, we conduct a theoretical review of the concept and nature of the survey used to promote institutional improvement, considering the significance of this survey in anti-corruption policies. The fact-finding survey or investigation for anti-corruption policies and system improvement hosted by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission can be used as an effective corruption control tool because it not only has its own ripple effect but also has a large impact on the subsequent operation of the system. However, since the purpose of the survey under this Act is different from a general fact-finding survey, there is a need to establish more detailed and predictable standards and procedures for the survey method, survey conduct, and use of survey results as provided in the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations. Considering the above factors, it is necessary to comprehensively supplement the fact-finding system, including institutionalizing each type of fact-finding survey and investigation, clarifying the detailed implementation procedures of the fact-finding survey and investigation, and establishing a relationship with the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations.