"Is this the difference between the top-ranked and runner-up candidates?" Tax Accountant Passers' Book Photos Spark Debate

Photos of the Top-Ranked and Runner-Up Candidates' Books Appear Side by Side
Online Debate Over the Amount of Notes and Signs of Use
Four Exam Proctors: "We Saw No Suspicious Behavior"

As allegations of misconduct against the top-ranked candidate in the 63rd Tax Accountant Qualification Exam continue to spread, photos of study materials shared by the top-ranked and runner-up candidates have also become a point of comparison, fueling further controversy. The comparison stems from the marked difference in the notes and signs of use on their books. On November 12, a post titled "The Difference Between the Top-Ranked and Runner-Up Candidates' Books in the Tax Accountant Exam That's Causing a Stir" appeared on social media.

“Top Candidate’s Book Is Pristine, While the Runner-Up’s Is Tattered”... Eyes on Textbooks of Successful Tax Accountant Candidates. Screenshots from blogs and YouTube.

The post showed side by side a photo of the top-ranked candidate, identified as Candidate A, at a study-room desk and photos of the runner-up's study materials featured in a YouTube video. Candidate A's photo showed an open textbook on a bookstand, along with writing instruments and other items. By contrast, the runner-up's books were densely marked with highlighter and handwritten notes, and showed clear signs of repeated use, including creased pages and some pages torn out.

As the photos spread, some internet users focused on the stark contrast between the condition of the two candidates' books. This came as questions continued to be raised about the top-ranked candidate's unusually high score, and signs of wear on the books also became a point of comparison. However, it has not been confirmed how long each set of books had been used or what condition they were in when the photos were taken.

"Whenever I was awake, I was pretty much studying": Runner-Up's Study Methods Also Draw Renewed Attention

The runner-up's account of their exam preparation and subject-by-subject study methods, shared on their YouTube channel, has also drawn renewed attention online. In the video, the runner-up showed a tax law summary book and said, "I read this book a lot while traveling to and from the academy." They explained that the book became tattered from repeated reading, so they eventually bought a new edition to study from. They added that some pages of the newly purchased book had also been torn out.

They said that, when studying tax law, they organized statutory provisions and court precedents together, and looked up material not covered in the textbook in other reference books and copied it into their notes. In particular, they diagrammed the facts of cases cited in precedents in the book, then repeatedly reviewed them to learn the key issues. Asked how many hours a day they studied, they replied, "I didn't really keep track of the time. I think I was pretty much studying whenever I was awake." Later in the video, they also demonstrated solving a tax accounting problem on the spot.

They apologized in advance that they might get stuck while solving problems because they had not studied tax accounting for about three months since the exam ended, then proceeded to solve a problem involving bad debts and the allowance for doubtful accounts. They also addressed the recent controversy over AI smart glasses. The runner-up said they do not normally wear glasses and did not wear any at the exam site.

A Perfect 100 in a Subject With an Average Score of 30... Questions Focus on Top Candidate's Results

The controversy began with the unusually high score Candidate A shared. In the first-round exam held in April 2026, Candidate A scored 397.5 out of 400, for an average of 99.375. They got just one of the 160 questions wrong. Their scores by subject were 97.5 in Public Finance, 100 in Introduction to Tax Law, 100 in Introduction to Accounting, and 100 in Commercial Law. Their score in Introduction to Tax Law in particular became the focus of the controversy.

Questions have been raised over whether the top scorer on the 63rd Tax Accountant Qualification Examination, identified only by the surname Han, used AI glasses. After Han said they missed just one of the 160 questions on the first-stage exam, even practicing tax accountants questioned whether such a score was possible within the time limit. The photo shows the certificate of passing that Han posted on their blog. Blog

According to statistics from the Human Resources Development Service of Korea, the average score among the 16,856 candidates who took Introduction to Tax Law this year was just 30.18. While 74.21% of candidates failed the subject by scoring below 40, Candidate A received a perfect score. Results that examine candidates confirmed through information disclosure requests reportedly showed that, aside from Candidate A, no one scored 90 or higher in Introduction to Tax Law, and the second-highest score was in the 80s.

The overall pass rate for the first-round exam was also 18.09%, down from 22.55% last year. Candidate A scored 663 out of 800, for an average of 82.875, on the second-round exam, which consisted of essay questions. This was more than 33 points above this year's second-round passing average of 49.75. After the results, which showed a wide gap from those of other candidates, became known, voices online questioned whether such a score was achievable within the time limit. Some even alleged that the candidate may have used smart glasses equipped with artificial intelligence (AI) to view exam questions or obtain answers.

However, these claims remain speculation and have not been substantiated by objective evidence. As the controversy intensified, the Human Resources Development Service of Korea, the exam administrator, began checking the facts. On November 12, the agency said that its review of Candidate A's exam process and grading procedures had found no irregularities to date that would raise suspicions of cheating.

According to reports, all four proctors who supervised Candidate A's first- and second-round exams said they had not witnessed the use of smart glasses or any behavior that would raise suspicions of cheating during the exams. No related irregularities were recorded on the candidate roster, either. The agency said that announcements at the exam site, proctor training, and identity verification procedures were conducted normally, and that no issues were found in the computerized grading of the multiple-choice first-round exam. However, experts are conducting an additional review of the answer sheets from the essay-based second-round exam.

Human Resources Development Service of Korea Has Experts Review Second-Round Answer Sheets

Meanwhile, internet users are divided over the incident. Some have emphasized that caution is needed before suspecting or declaring a specific candidate guilty of misconduct based solely on a high exam score. They say that if the allegations are untrue or cannot be substantiated, the person concerned could suffer harm that is difficult to remedy, including damage to their reputation.

Smart glasses sit on an exam paper during training for staff in charge of smart glasses for the 2027 College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT), which is eight days away, at the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education in Yongsan-gu, Seoul, on Nov. 11. Yonhap News Agency

Online posts comparing the top-ranked and runner-up candidates' study materials should likewise be viewed with caution. How long books are used, study methods, and note-taking habits vary from person to person, so the degree of wear on a book alone cannot determine how much someone studied or whether their exam results are genuine. In particular, no concrete evidence has been found to date that Candidate A used AI smart glasses at the exam site. The facts behind the controversy are expected to become clear after the exam authorities complete their additional checks.

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