“Of the total admission fee, the fate of 1,030,000 won remains unknown. Freshmen cannot help but feel puzzled,” read the pickets that the students standing outside 4.18 Memorial Hall were holding up. It was cold outside, but the atmosphere seemed to heat up as the students yelled for what they rightly deserve—a right to know about where and how their admission fee is used. The students were shouting louder and louder so that their voices could reach inside the hall, where the 2016 Korea University Tuition Review Board (KUTRB) was going on.

Admission fee , a separate notion from the average tuition fee, refers to a sum of money freshmen are required to pay as they matriculate at KU. Almost every university, even those in foreign countries, requires that this fee be paid. However, the shame is that both KU Anam and Sejong Campus require a 1,030,000 won admission fee and are ranked the top two universities in Korea that require the highest matriculation fees. What is worse is that there is absolutely no transparent information as to where and how this money is used, nor any explanation as to why the price is so high.

This is the first time that the legitimacy of admission fees was discussed openly at KUTRB. Although many have been casting doubt on the collection of admission fees, no formal questioning has taken place. When asked on the whereabouts of the admission fees, the response KU gave was rather firm and concise. The two answers the university gave were as follows: one, under the guidelines of the Ministry of Education, collecting admission fees is perfectly legal; two, admission fees are summed with regular tuition fees and thus used for multiple purposes.

“This certainly explains that admission fees can indeed be collected. However, it does not mean that 1,030,000 worth of it can be left in question,” Park Se Hoon (’13, Political Science and International Relations), the 48th President of KU Student Association (KUSA) protested. At the KUTRB discussion, Park brought out statistical references that testified that KU admission fees are absurd. Even Ivy Leagues, prestigious schools with one of the highest tuitions around the world collect admission fees that amount to merely two to three percent of tuition fees. As for KU, the percentage has reached 17.

“If there is no rationale for admission fees to be collected, it should not be collected. If there is a rationale behind all this, an appropriate amount should be collected,” Park firmly said. Although students and KUSA have constantly been asking for the usage details of the admission fees to be open to the public, KU has refused to do so, claiming that such information does not exist. Thus, as the mystery of where admission fees disappeared to continues to deepen with the persistent, secretive conduct of KU, the conflict between the students and university is exacerbating.

If KU continues to be uncooperative in making information transparent or rationalizing the collection of admission fees, KUSA is even considering litigation. “We are more than willing to do what it takes to solve this problem,” said Park. “The university should definitely show the rationale for admission fees, and demonstrate more transparency when collecting them,” he added. Students, too, are bracing themselves for a long fight to trace admission fees that have vanished into the hands of KU. As students unite to track down this hidden money, they will also stand up for their right to know. The results as to what will happen in the future is unknown; however, it is clear that whether the university will reconcile with students or further antagonize them is clearly up to the administration.