SEOUL, May 20 (AJP) - In South Korea, artists must prove they are artists before qualifying for public grants, and many complain the opaque and exhausting certification process has become a bureaucratic ordeal that leaves them spending more time on paperwork than artwork.
Artist Certification falls under the Korea Artists Welfare Foundation (KAWF), an agency under the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. It is effectively required to apply for government aid, public grants and welfare programs.
The system was born out of two tragedies.
On Nov. 6, 2010, Lee Jin-won of the one-man indie band “Rock Will Never Die (Moonlight Fairy Grand Slam)” was found dead at his home in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul. On Jan. 29, 2011, screenwriter Choi Go-eun was found dead in Anyang.
Both were respected figures in the indie music and film industries but suffered severe financial hardship due to unfair contract structures and irregular income.
Their deaths led to the enforcement of the Artist Welfare Act on Nov. 18, 2012, followed by the establishment of the Korea Artists Welfare Foundation the next day as a minimum social safety net for struggling artists.
But many artists say the benefits have fallen far short of that mission.
Controversy erupted in late March when the famous indie band “Broccoli, You Too?” failed the Artist Career Verification screening. The band took to X to express frustration, revealing that it had submitted records of royalty payments from album releases only to receive a “disqualified” notice.
At the time, the foundation explained that it evaluates the “continuity of activities” rather than an artist’s fame alone. However, the band had released a full-length album and performed dozens of concerts throughout 2025, while its appearance on KBS’s “Open Concert” had been confirmed just days before the rejection notice.
Following the controversy, complaints from artists across multiple disciplines poured out. Many argued that guidance on the system remains insufficient and inconsistent.
Painter and contemporary artist Jung So-hee was one of them.
It took Jung more than two years to pass the Artist Certification screening. Despite a career spanning over 20 exhibitions, her applications were repeatedly rejected or returned for supplementary documentation until she finally received approval this year.
“I had to spend more energy writing reports to prove I am an artist than on my actual creative work,” Jung said.
Jung said she still has little confidence she would pass again if she reapplied for the same project because she has never been clearly informed why she ultimately succeeded.
Installation artist Shin Yun-jung applied four times, only to be rejected each time.
“It was difficult to prepare because the criteria for qualitative screening were unclear,” Shin said. “Even when I tried to infer from other artists’ experiences, the standards kept changing.”
The lengthy review process has also become a major source of frustration.
Artists including Jung and Shin said they waited between three and six months for re-evaluation results. A stage director, who requested anonymity, recalled receiving a “disqualified” notice while traveling from a logistics center job to a theater rehearsal.
“It felt hollow after waiting for four months,” he said.
Outdated screening criteria have also come under criticism. Painter A pointed out that participating in “art fairs” — auction-style exhibitions — is not recognized as professional artistic activity.
“The fastest way to build a relationship with a gallery and hold a solo exhibition is to pay to participate in an art fair,” a painter, who also requested anonymity, explained. Despite submitting years of consecutive participation in a major local art fair, she was told the experience could not be counted.
“It makes no sense that even mega-fairs like KIAF or Frieze, which the First Lady has visited, cannot be counted because they aren’t ‘solo exhibitions,’” she added.
As dissatisfaction grew, a “Task Force Seminar on Artist Career Verification” was held on April 22 at the National Assembly Members’ Hall, hosted by Rep. Son Sol of the Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee.
Attendees criticized what they described as a lack of communication and transparency in the deliberation process.
“We aren’t asking to lower the threshold blindly; we are asking for clear reasons and standards for rejection,” said installation artist Lee Seung-hyun.
Calls for transparency in the review process also continued throughout the seminar. Oh Se-gon, a stage actor who participated in the original task force that helped design the Artist Career Verification system, argued that “it must be clearly revealed who the committee members are and whether there were offline discussions and debate processes.”
Critics also pointed to overseas examples.
In the case of Arts Council England, active artists evaluate the eligibility of fellow artists for welfare services, and the identities of reviewers as well as approval and rejection outcomes are disclosed transparently. This stands in contrast to the KAWF system, where even the professions and age groups of review committee members are not easily disclosed.
The government and the foundation offered their own explanations.
Kim Ga-jin, head of the planning and coordination team at the Korea Artists Welfare Foundation, said during the seminar that the foundation must verify three things: whether art is the applicant’s primary occupation, whether the output can be objectively verified through documentation and whether the work has been consumed or distributed publicly.
Regarding delays, the foundation cited a shortage of personnel. As of March 2026, just five full-time and five contract employees were responsible for processing applications from more than 43,000 people.
The foundation further argued that the review process has become more time-consuming because of concerns that public funds could flow to cases unrelated to genuine creative activity, especially as generative AI and hobby-based creations continue to blur the boundaries of artistic work. Officials said a “request-based” system requiring a certain level of career history and supporting evidence remains necessary as a minimum verification mechanism.
Some European countries such as Germany and France have also faced criticism over the scale of artist welfare spending because such programs are closely tied to broader social security systems. While recognizing artistic activity itself as labor has expanded the social safety net for artists, concerns have also steadily grown that the boundaries of eligibility could become too broad.
Yet many artists say the foundation’s explanations remain contradictory.
One frequently cited example is the “Artist Activity Savings Account” project launched last year. Despite the claimed shortage of reviewers, applications for the program closed in less than half a day on Feb. 4, 2026, under a first-come, first-served system.
The use of individual rather than household income standards also sparked criticism.
“People receiving financial support from a spouse or parents without earning a penny can be selected without filtering, while artists who must work for a living are put at a disadvantage,” said an indie film director, who requested anonymity after being rejected under the criteria.
The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism’s total budget for this year stands at approximately 7.85 trillion won ($5.33 billion), up 11.2 percent from last year. The Korea Artists Welfare Foundation directly administers 117.6 billion won, while an estimated 200 billion won is tied to artist verification-related support programs.
Yet many artists argue that where and how the money is ultimately spent remains opaque.
Artists interviewed for this story agreed that public funding can only function properly if officials at both the foundation and the ministry develop a deeper understanding of artists and the broader creative ecosystem.
“There needs to be a broader effort to research and understand the actual creative activities of artists,” Jung emphasized. “I am eager to ask whether the current standards are truly for artists who dedicate themselves solely to creation.”
“The current application method is more preoccupied with ‘where and with whom you exhibit’ rather than ‘what kind of work you do,’” Shin said. “This structure is absolutely advantageous for those who can afford rental fees — in other words, those who do not need the welfare system.”
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.