[Exclusive] Controversy Over 'Illegal Artifact Appraisal'... Cultural Heritage Administration 'Standing By' and Leaving Appraisal in a 'Blind Spot'

Questioning the 'Reliability' of Emotionally Entangled Appraisals
Rising Need for the Introduction of Official Certification System

The photo is not related to the article content. [Provided by Cultural Heritage Administration]

[Asia Economy Reporter La Young-cheol] As the public discussion on the tax payment in kind system for artworks and cultural properties is underway, voices demanding improvements in the appraisal system are growing louder.

In particular, concerns have been raised that appraisals of cultural properties or artifacts conducted by private unofficial organizations are illegal acts carried out without legal grounds.

There are also doubts about the reliability of artifact appraisals due to the lack of objectivity in appraisals and the absence of a certification system.

Moreover, for decades, a few select private organizations have almost monopolized appraisals, leading to suspicions of "monopoly and preferential treatment."

However, the Cultural Heritage Administration, the supervisory authority, has faced criticism for effectively neglecting the appraisal blind spots under the pretext of "custom," prompting calls for the introduction of a certification system for cultural property appraisers.

Currently, it is legally impossible to appraise movable cultural properties such as artworks, and even the reliability of such appraisals is difficult to guarantee.

◆ Why Are Private Organization Appraisals Not Trusted?

According to the Cultural Heritage Administration, cultural property appraisal organizations in Korea are divided into national institutions and private unofficial organizations registered as incorporated associations.

Under current laws, national and public institutions generally do not appraise privately owned artifacts except for special reasons. They only handle cultural property designation, smuggling crackdowns, and verification of donated artifacts.

However, there are various controversies surrounding artifact (movable cultural property) appraisals conducted by private organizations.

In particular, private organizations are said to have a strong character as interest protection groups for related traders, with most appraisal committee members reportedly being antique dealers.

As a result, individual conflicts of interest are intertwined, reducing credibility and lowering trust in authenticity verification and market value appraisals.

Some voices call for reappraisal of artifacts, treasures, and cultural properties held by local governments.

This is because appraisals are conducted based on the subjective judgment and perspective of a very small number of individuals, making it difficult to expect objective and precise appraisals through scientific investigation or diverse analyses and opinions from experts in the relevant fields.

There is also controversy over the illegality of evaluating the price of artifacts without a nationally certified appraiser license.

Attorney Heo Beom-haeng of Gangnam Law Firm pointed out, "Appraisals conducted by appraisal committee members belonging to private organizations without legal grounds or appraiser qualifications, which assign prices rather than authenticating cultural properties or artifacts, are legally illegal," adding, "Cultural property appraisals are in a blind spot within the scope of work performed by certified appraisers."

According to related laws, the appraisal system has been implemented since July 1989 under the "Act on the Public Announcement of Land Prices and the Appraisal of Land, etc." by unifying the land appraiser system and the certified appraiser system.

Later, the "Act on Appraisal and Appraisers (Article 11)," enacted in 2016 to protect citizens' property rights and contribute to national economic development, stipulates that only those who pass the appraiser exam (Article 14) can perform appraisals.

Accordingly, the general view in related fields toward private unofficial organization appraisals is largely negative.

Private organizations prioritize vested interests rather than considering the academic value, regional value, usability, or future value of movable cultural properties.

An expert in folklore studies argued, "Prices are determined between the parties buying and selling," and "It is highly problematic for appraisal committee members to set prices and intervene in the market."

He added, "Beyond legality, there is a kind of collusion within the antique trade industry," criticizing the government's irresponsibility by saying, "These problems arise due to the lack of a proper system."

A curator from a local government in Gyeonggi Province pointed out, "In movable cultural property appraisals, appraisal refers to determining authenticity, and evaluation refers to assigning a price," adding, "Since private organizations involve collusive forms entangled with vested interests, objectivity inevitably suffers."

He warned that if appraisal committee members belonging to private organizations are involved in important appraisals simply because they belong to the organization without verifying who they are, how they were appointed, or whether they were properly vetted, problems may arise.

Lee Jae-won, spokesperson for the Cultural Heritage Administration, emphasized in a phone interview with this paper, "Although the Cultural Heritage Administration has approved the articles of incorporation of private unofficial organizations, it has never granted them credibility," and stated, "The Cultural Heritage Administration is not related to problems arising from appraisals conducted by private organizations that are merely incorporated associations."

He added, "The criticism that market prices are set solely because of long-term involvement is quite unreasonable and lacks objectivity, which leads to the conclusion that a cultural property appraisal certification system should be introduced."

Ko Young-joo, an official in charge of approving the articles of incorporation of private organizations at the Cultural Heritage Administration's Safety Technology Division, explained, "We do not distinguish the scope of appraisal between 'authenticity appraisal' and 'market price appraisal,'" and "Currently, people belonging to private organizations do not hold national qualifications such as certified public accountant, licensed real estate agent, or certified appraiser."

A representative from the Gyeongju Cultural Heritage Research Institute said, "It seems there has been no way for national institutions to restrict transactions of private property," and added, "Including TV programs, private evaluations are at the level of asking for prices of privately owned items, and it is questionable whether transactions will even occur."

According to this paper's investigation, the consensus among related workers and experts is that private organizations' appraisals of movable cultural properties have many shortcomings in terms of credibility, accuracy, and ethics.

◆ Why Is the Introduction of a National Certification System Necessary?

There are no certified cultural property appraisers in Korea. Therefore, to gain expertise in related fields, one must obtain relevant qualifications, and a system with standards for artworks should be introduced.

To secure the reliability of movable cultural property appraisals, the government needs to establish a policy-based system to train or nurture experts, and a related national certification system is proposed as one solution.

Currently, without a system or framework, the market is dominated by certain individuals or organizations relying solely on long-standing customs, entangled in vested interests and protecting established privileges.

Therefore, while authenticity is important for artifacts, fairness in the process is also a key pillar. Whether the appraisal was conducted strictly, fairly, and objectively is an important basis for judgment.

Professor Do Jin-young of Gyeongju University said, "While the need for a certification system is felt, it will be very difficult to determine the direction or method," advising, "To have expertise, one must study the relevant field and obtain a certification."

Professor Do also said, "I hope prices are not determined by any other factors," and urged, "The government should create a systematic system and properly assess the value of cultural properties."

He emphasized that the system should be established in a way that guarantees professionalism and diversity and allows scientific and systematic analysis.

There is also an argument that certified curators who have obtained official qualifications in related fields could be an alternative.

Another curator criticized, "The government bears great responsibility for the situation reaching this point. Curators have the least vested interests. Although many professors participate in appraisal committees at public institutions, regionality is often neglected."

Some experts point out problems arising from evaluations that do not consider regional characteristics.

He continued, "More education and appraisal standards should be created centered on curators to expand participation opportunities, but there are many regrets due to customs and lack of human network formation."

He also suggested, "Appraisals so far have lacked consistency, and reappraisals of all artifacts nationwide are necessary," adding, "To proceed systematically or institutionally, necessary funding and professional manpower must be invested."

This implies that a certification system could serve as a stable mechanism to eliminate appraisals influenced by favoritism or any pressure, providing an objective alternative.

The Cultural Heritage Administration has also recognized the need for a certification system for appraisers of movable cultural properties.

Ko Young-joo, an official, said, "There are separate certifications for cultural property repair technicians and repair craftsmen recognized by the Cultural Heritage Administration," adding, "If a certification system related to appraisals is established, problematic issues could be clearly resolved."

However, the Cultural Heritage Administration also noted that internal discussions and reviews involving multiple departments are necessary, and due to considerations related to the certification system and exams, immediate implementation is difficult.

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