Although the origin of the East Asian age reckoning is not clear, experts maintain that it is associated with the Chinese 60-day calendar cycle, which is a major element of the Korean culture. Though other countries such as Japan and China have ceased to use this system, it is still used in Korea, where it is known as the Korean age system. Given the rise in the number of complaints that it is unnecessarily complicated, its abolishment has been debated.

China, Japan, and Vietnam, which used to employ the East Asian age reckoning, have switched to calculating age based on the international system. On the other hand, Korea still uses this traditional system (which counts new-borns as one-year-old at birth), for all official institution and documentation, while still employing international age for most legal documents. Implementing both systems at the same time creates major confusion when reconciling the Korean age and the age on official documents. In fact, the general public has a negative attitude toward the Korean age system. A survey conducted from December 24 to 27, 2021 by the Hankook Research Team found that 71 percent of the respondents agreed with the abolishment of the Korean age for official uses, much higher than the 15 percent who wanted to keep the system.

Accordingly, another problem with the use of the Korean age system is the risks surrounding the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination mandate for children aged between 12 and 18. If the Korean age system is used, it is difficult to determine the eligibility for youth vaccination. Despite this, the system has not been abolished because some people maintain that it is a deeply entrenched tradition in Korea. In addition, this system is still being used because, as Choi Young-gap, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Sungkyunkwan Confucian Broadcasting mentioned in an article in Korea Economic Daily, the Korean age system is being compared to the acceptance of life that as soon as a baby in Korea is born, the Korea age system automatically applies and that the confusion only comes from the differences between cultures.

Despite the arguments for its retention, more Koreans want the system to be abolished for a number of reasons. For example, it can minimize the confusion in how it is used in daily lives different from that of the legal age; like having two bases for age determination - one for actual age and another for official documents. In addition, applying different standards of age can lead to misdiagnosis or incorrect prescriptions when treating patients. Director Yeon Hee-dong of the K Internal Medicine Department expressed concern over treating patients using the current age system. Furthermore, the Korean age should be abolished because it can also reduce conflict in the society which has the age-based hierarchical culture. This means giving much respect to whoever is considered older when it comes to everyday age.

In light of this issue, it is time for lawmakers to sit down and consider the matter seriously. Though some people view the abolishment of the Korean age system as discarding traditional ideas, it is important to address the needs of the majority in society. It is not simply a misguided effort to imitate the Western culture. In this case, following the international age system may not be such a bad idea because it will set a standard for age determination in all areas of living which will cover all three ways of counting age in Korea.