Under the Lee Administration, the Financial Supervisory Service Rides a Powerful Governor... Aiming for Over 2,600 Employees as a 'Powerful Supervisory Agency'

Workforce Expected to Grow by Around 200 This Year
Organization and Influence Expanding Amid Strong Presidential Mandate on Unfair Trading
Controversy Over Enhanced Authority... Rising Tensions With the Financial Services Commission

The Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) has been rapidly scaling up since the inauguration of the Lee Jaemyung administration. The expansion of the organization’s size and authority is being driven by the presidential office’s policy to eradicate unfair trading in the capital market and the increased demand for financial market oversight.

Chan Jin Lee, Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service

According to financial authorities on May 28, if the FSS completes two rounds of experienced professional recruitment in the first half of this year and the open recruitment for new employees in the second half, the total workforce is expected to reach around 2,600 employees.

The FSS has already completed the hiring of 40 experienced professionals this year and is currently in the process of recruiting an additional 60. As of the end of March, the FSS workforce stood at 2,441, and once the ongoing recruitment process is finalized, this number will increase to around 2,540. If the second-half open recruitment is conducted at last year's scale (70 people), the total number of employees is likely to surpass 2,600.

The pace of personnel growth is unusual. The FSS workforce has steadily increased from 2,184 in 2021 to 2,308 in 2023 and 2,392 in 2025, but this year alone, an increase of more than 200 employees is expected.

The background to this organizational expansion lies in President Lee Jaemyung’s strong commitment to establishing order in the capital market. As the government has announced a tough stance against stock price manipulation and unfair trading, the FSS is simultaneously reinforcing its Capital Markets Special Judicial Police (special judicial police) and the joint response team for eradicating stock price manipulation. As a result, the FSS’s organizational scale continues to grow.

The authority of the FSS is also being rapidly strengthened. A notable example is the investigative authority granted to the FSS’s Capital Markets Special Judicial Police this year. The FSS can now initiate its own investigations with only the resolution of the Investigation Review Committee, without the need for prosecutorial supervision. In addition, a plan to grant the FSS compulsory investigation powers in the capital market is under discussion. Previously, these powers required either a complaint from the Securities and Futures Commission of the Financial Services Commission and prosecutorial oversight (for investigative authority) or were granted only to Financial Services Commission officials (for compulsory investigation powers), but these authorities are gradually shifting to the FSS.

In this process, the role of Lee Chanjin, Governor of the FSS, has been drawing attention. Both inside and outside financial authorities, there is growing assessment that Governor Lee, based on strong presidential trust, is closely communicating with the presidential office and leading both organizational expansion and the strengthening of authority.

However, views are divided regarding the expansion of the FSS’s authority. Internally, there is significant dissatisfaction that while the organization and its powers are growing, oversight and inspection work has already reached its limits. Work related to real estate project financing, digital finance, virtual assets, and unfair trading investigations continues to increase, but there are concerns that the current workforce and authority are insufficient to keep up.

An FSS official stated, “Revisions to supervisory regulations and compulsory investigation powers in the capital market originally belonged to the FSS, but were taken by the Financial Services Commission. Our work continues to increase, but our authority and compensation lag behind. On top of that, we are subject to regulations at the level of civil servants, such as restrictions on stock trading, asset disclosure, and post-employment limitations, which is leading to severe staff attrition.”

On the other hand, there are also considerable concerns about the excessive expansion of the FSS. Legally, the FSS is a special-purpose private entity commissioned to perform the work of the Financial Services Commission. There is ongoing debate as to whether it is appropriate to substantially expand quasi-judicial powers for such an organization.

Lee Ok-won, Chairman of the Financial Services Commission (left), and Lee Chan-jin, Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service, are attending the full meeting of the Political Affairs Committee held at the National Assembly in February. 2026.2.5 Photo by Kim Hyunmin

A sense of friction can also be detected between the Financial Services Commission and the FSS. Legally, the FSS is structured to operate under the direction of the Financial Services Commission, but differences in perspective between the two sides are surfacing over key issues. These include the granting of investigative authority to the Capital Markets Special Judicial Police, the proposal for restructuring the governance of financial companies, and the imposition of fines related to the Hong Kong H Index (Hang Seng China Enterprises Index, HSCEI) equity-linked securities (ELS) incident.

An official from the Financial Services Commission commented, “There are times when the FSS tries to lead policy direction by prioritizing the presidential office’s stance without sufficient consultation. It is problematic for a private entity like the FSS to be granted such excessive authority without adequate responsibility and checks and balances.”

Despite significant internal dissatisfaction, the Financial Services Commission is maintaining a ‘low-key’ approach. Although it established a task force for FSS reform in March to prepare reform plans related to inspection, penalties, and licensing, the announcement has been postponed from the first half to the second half of the year. While this is partly due to more pressing issues, some observers believe the task force has effectively lost momentum under the current powerful FSS governor.

Within the financial sector, there is a prevailing view that as the FSS continues to expand its organization and functions, conflict with the Financial Services Commission is bound to intensify.

A financial sector official noted, “There have always been disputes between the two agencies, but recently, as governors with close ties to the administration have been appointed in succession and the FSS’s presence has grown, tensions have risen further. Ultimately, discussions about revising the current supervisory framework will continue to reignite.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.