Student fund embezzlements have been reported across universities

Recent cases of student association fees and club dues being used for personal purposes have raised concerns about financial oversight at universities. These incidents reveal limitations in existing financial management systems, as student councils and autonomous student organizations have not been able to respond effectively to embezzlement and misuse. This raises the question of whether current student organization rules are strong enough to prevent misuse and recover funds after it occurs.  

Embezzlement Cases Across Universities Raise Questions

On April 28, controversy rose over the private use of student association fees in the Dept. of Applied English Linguistics and Translation Studies (AELTS) at Kyung Hee University (KHU). An audit conducted by the College of Humanities Audit Committee Task Force confirmed that Hwang Hee-won, a former president of the 57th AELTS Student Association had personally used 7,031,200 won in student association fees during her term. 

According to the audit, a total of 143 cases of personal use, including 135 purchases at convenience stores, hospitals, and pharmacies, as well as eight remittances to the former president’s personal account were confirmed. Multiple cases of double reimbursement were also identified, in which payments were made using the Student Association’s corporate card and reimbursement payments were then transferred to the former president’s personal account.

One reason the embezzlement was not revealed during the former president’s term was the way student association expenditures were disclosed. AELTS Student Association used Notion to disclose student association expenditures in real time, and students believed that this system ensured transparency. 

However, the AELTS Audit Committee’s audit report stated that “the former president excluded only the privately used transactions when uploading the accounting records, which ultimately resulted in deceiving students.” Although part of the money has since been repaid, a substantial amount still remains unpaid.

A similar case occurred on July 9 at Yorijori, a club at Kyungpook National University (KNU). The club’s former president was found to have transferred 6,775,000 won from club dues to a personal account for stock investments between July 2025 and March 2026.

According to an investigation by the Central Audit Committee of the KNU Student Association, the former president charged club dues into Coupay, Coupang’s digital payment service, converted the funds back into cash, and transferred them to a personal account. Dividends generated by the stock investment were confirmed to have been used for meals for club executives, and the Central Audit Committee subsequently ordered the former president to repay 6,002,455 won, including the stock assets and dividends, classified as improperly used funds.

Similar cases of embezzlement and misappropriation have been raised at other universities, including Jeonbuk National University (JBNU) and Inha University. As cases involving the use of personal accounts to manage student fees, insufficient disclosure of supporting documents, and delayed repayment after embezzlement have continued to emerge as issues, concerns over trust within the student communities are growing.

College of Humanities

Photo by Hong, Jeong-min / The University Life

Where KHU’s Rules Fall Short

These incidents raise questions over whether current Student Association Bylaws provide sufficient accountability after misuse is discovered.

At KHU Seoul Campus, Student Association Bylaw, Article 62, Paragraph 2 stipulates that “the student association president and accounting officers shall bear joint responsibility when a problem occurs.” However, the provision does not specify the exact scope of problem and joint responsibility. It also does not state who must return improperly used funds, by what deadline, or through what procedure. 

Likewise,  Central Accounting Audit Committee’s Audit Enforcement Bylaw, Article 3, Paragraph 1 provides for disciplinary measures such as referral to the Audit Committee and the submission of a public apology, but does not contain details of repayment procedures or follow up sanctions when repayment is not carried out.

In contrast, KHU Global Campus has more detailed rules. Under Financial Management Bylaw, Chapter 6, Article 28 improperly managed funds must be fully repaid by the person responsible. Repayment must be completed within 15-days of disciplinary action, or the penalty points are doubled. Accumulated penalty points can lead to sanctions, including suspension of financial operations, restrictions on representative authority, or loss of membership rights.  

Despite these provisions, Global Campus bylaws leave gaps in the process of recovering funds. The repayment period is left to the decision of the Central Financial Management Committee, and the maximum 15-day deadline applies only after disciplinary action has been taken. The rules also do not specify how funds are to be recovered when repayment is not completed within the deadline, nor do they set out clear criteria for referring the cases to the University or investigative authorities. Although the internal disciplinary system is relatively detailed, gaps remain in the procedures for fully recovering financial losses.

These limitations are not confined to KHU. JBNU Student Association Bylaws state student representatives must sign a monetary restorage pledge before running for office. It explicitly establishes an obligation to restore improperly used funds. However, as with the Global Campus, the rules do not clearly specify a concrete repayment deadline or additional measures where the obligation is not fulfilled, creating limitations in actual enforcement.

Inha University Student Association bylaws are also structured primarily around the management of accounting records, audits, and disciplinary procedures, while no provision could be found that specifically sets out procedures for recovering improperly used funds after a problem occurs.

Although the rules and bylaws differ by university, most institutions provide relatively detailed provisions on accounting procedures and audit, they fail to specify responsibility after embezzlement is uncovered, concrete repayment procedures and follow up measures. The repeated misuse cases therefore suggest institutional gaps in defining repayment obligations and accountability.

AELTS 58th Student Association’s statement

Toward Stronger Accountability

Practical improvements are needed to address the limitations of the current system.

Professor Lim Chae-hong of Anyang University’s Dept. of Public Administration said student association fees require clearer recovery procedures for recovering financial losses.

“Because student association fees are shared assets voluntarily contributed by students, declarative provisions such as simply stating that ‘the original amount must be restored’ or that ‘individuals must take responsibility’ are not enough to ensure prevention or effective recovery of losses.” 

He added that bylaws should set a clear repayment deadline and specify what happens if the deadline is missed, including university investigation, civil claims or possible criminal action. 

Prof. Lim also emphasized the need for preventive accounting systems, arguing that “preventive control is far more effective than punishment after embezzlement has already occurred.” He recommended requiring multiple approvals for expenditures above a certain amount and managing all student association fees through an account under the organization’s name. He also called for mandatory retention of receipts and supporting documents, as well as clear disclosure standards that allow students to access financial records at any time. 

Students have also expressed concerns over the accessibility and transparency of student fee expenditures. Woo Chae-won, a student of the Dept. of Business Administration at JBNU, said that even when expenditure records are disclosed, it is often difficult to determine whether student fees are being managed transparently because the access route or disclosure method is unclear. 

She added, “There should be a mandatory accounting report that discloses transaction records and receipts every month,” emphasizing the need for a management system that guarantees students’ right to know and enhances transparency in the operation of student fees.

Furthermore, university oversight must also be carried out without intruding on the autonomy of student self-governance. Prof. Lim said, “What matters is not for the university to intervene in the student association’s projects or decision-making, but to establish a minimum institutional foundation such as accounting standards, audit procedures, and education,” emphasizing that building minimum management safeguards capable of preventing accounting incidents while maintaining the independence of student self-governance will be an important task going forward.

Repeated cases of student fee embezzlement cannot be addressed solely as individual ethical misconduct. Recent incidents at several universities have exposed gaps in student association bylaws, particularly in defining responsibility, repayment procedures, and preventive financial controls. Clear repayment rules, transparent accounting, and stronger preventive measures may therefore be necessary to rebuild trust in student-run organizations.