This article was displayed on the ChosunBiz MoneyMove (MM) site at 9:18 a.m. on Mar. 10, 2026.
Kim Hak-kyun, head of the Korea Venture Capital Association, who marked his first anniversary in office on the 25th, cited the "distortion of the exit market" as the biggest weakness in Korea's venture ecosystem. Venture investment is gradually expanding with support from policy funds and private capital, but the KOSDAQ market, the stage where venture corporations should take the next leap, still revolves around retail investors.
Meeting at the Quantum Ventures Korea headquarters in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, recently, Kim said, "In a market where 95% of transaction participants are individuals, there is virtually no party that will look at a corporation's fundamentals and invest for the long term," adding, "We need to raise the share of institutional investors to at least 10% so that a virtuous cycle of post-listing growth, exit, and reinvestment can be completed." The solution Kim envisions is a 3 trillion won KOSDAQ-only fund. He argued that the market now needs a large sum that can send a clear signal. The following is a Q&A.
—It has been a year since you took office. How do you feel?
"Because I was elected president through a contested vote, I had the choice and support of member firms and was able to work with that momentum. The past year had many external variables, but I focused on making the agenda a reality, one by one. With help from seniors, juniors, and peers at member firms, the association's sense of issues was shared internally, and results accumulated."
—What tasks are you prioritizing in particular?
"While venture investment itself is growing with government policy and private support, the KOSDAQ market still has many structural issues that need fixing. Even after listing, there must be enough institutions that support corporations with a long horizon and supply additional capital for them to take another leap, but in today's KOSDAQ market, the investor base that can play that role is excessively thin. Only when institutions provide capital after listing and play their role as shareholders can corporations grow into global corporations."
—What is the biggest limitation of the KOSDAQ market?
"The structure is such that individuals account for most transactions. The share of institutional funds that can invest based on long-term fundamentals is far too low. At least about 10% of the market should be held by institutions so they can play a meaningful role. Only then can listed companies grow again through rights offerings or follow-on investments. This is not simply about propping up stock prices; it is about "how to supply post-listing growth capital in a stable manner.""
—You have consistently emphasized the need for a 3 trillion won KOSDAQ-only fund.
"Existing KOSDAQ venture funds were limited to around 30 billion won, so their impact on the overall market was limited. About 30 billion won cannot have a meaningful impact on the market. Just as venture funds have been fostered by policy at the unlisted stage in the venture ecosystem, institutional funds that provide systematic support are needed at the post-listing stage as well. In particular, if a large fund focused on corporations' rights offerings is created, it can have a direct impact on the market, and the very fact that institutions participate as shareholders can send a strong signal to both corporations and retail investors. Only when this structure takes hold can the venture ecosystem ultimately establish a private sector–led virtuous cycle."
—Have the execution plans been fleshed out?
"There is broad consensus among financial authorities and market participants on the need to revitalize KOSDAQ. However, there are slight differences in positions regarding the solution. The plan proposed by the association is to use part of the Public Growth Fund and have asset managers or securities firms manage it, matching more than 50% with private capital. Legislation does not necessarily have to come first. We can expand the framework of the existing KOSDAQ venture fund and apply it, and for now, if allocation and design are done well within the current system, it can be sufficiently attempted."
—There is also concern that when liquidity expands, venture company valuations could become inflated.
"After multiple cycles of bubble formation and collapse in the past, valuation judgments across the industry have become much more objective than before. When money increases, some industries may show inflationary phenomena, but that does not readily translate into a bubble across all venture investment. What is more important is to properly build a structure in which capital that flows into individual corporations connects to listing and exit, and then to second-stage growth. In the end, what matters more than the mere fact that "there is a lot of money" is whether the structure for exiting that money is healthy."
—How should we view investment in neglected sectors?
"It is to some extent inevitable that at certain times capital concentrates in promising sectors such as biotech, semiconductors, and robots. For example, sectors that were once in the spotlight, like platforms, are now at the stage of "separating the wheat from the chaff." When a new sector emerges, money flows in, players increase, a kind of bubble forms, and then winners emerge through competition and restructuring—this is a natural market logic. Also, the set of industrial sectors available for investment domestically has, in reality, decreased compared with the past. In the past, one could travel the country to find manufacturing investment opportunities, but now, as the industrial landscape has changed, resources inevitably flow to future industries."
—Which past period does the current Korean venture investment market resemble?
"It is correct to say there is no similar period. In the past, conglomerates led industry overall, and venture companies became partners or seized opportunities in local service areas such as the internet and mobile. Now, however, venture companies must compete directly with U.S. and Chinese companies. This means it is no longer a market with referenceable role models or right answers. Korean venture companies are no longer "fast followers" but are in the position of "first movers" that create their own stories and histories."
—Then can it also be seen that opportunities have increased for ventures and VCs?
"That is one way to see it. Conglomerates have areas where they excel as conglomerates, while venture companies can move faster and find new opportunities. VCs, behind them, take on the role of supplying long-term capital and supporting growth. In the end, national growth should move toward a structure where conglomerates and ventures each play their role and build it together."
—There are also critiques that there are too many VCs and that natural restructuring is needed.
"In principle, it is healthy for VC entries and exits to occur freely according to market logic. However, the VC industry has structural constraints different from general industries. If you form one or two funds, you usually have to manage them for about eight years, and if you fail to create a follow-on fund during that time and it becomes difficult to retain talent, it is still hard to exit the market immediately."
—Is there a solution at the association level?
"The association has already prepared a program to help a management company (GP) that wants to leave transfer its fund elsewhere and exit. Depending on the case, it could be a structure similar to a continuation fund, or a transfer to another GP. The idea is to ensure that funds under management are handled responsibly, while helping management firms that find it difficult to continue the business to leave the market for a certain amount of consideration. However, as expectations for the recent VC market have revived, the need to actually operate the program has somewhat diminished."
—You also changed the way the association is run.
"We created four new divisions within the association to broaden member participation. Each division—system improvement, KOSDAQ revitalization, global, and ecosystem soundness—was given a different mission, and the opinions produced there are compiled monthly and connected to the association's official voice and policy proposals. I believe this internal vitality at the association has, to some extent, contributed to the recent spread of discussions on revitalizing KOSDAQ."