This article was published on the ChosunBiz RM Report website at 4:02 p.m. on Aug. 26, 2026.
The Ministry of Justice is launching an expansion project for the Supreme Prosecutors' Office National Digital Forensic Center (NDFC) that has been delayed for years. The project will invest about 53 billion won to expand the insufficient facilities and equipment space.
However, with the abolition of prosecutors' investigative authority set for October, some in the ruling camp are arguing that the functions of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Scientific Investigation Department (forensics division) should be handed over to the police or the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, raising expectations of controversy over where and how to use the forensic infrastructure being expanded with a massive budget.
◇ Not even enough space for servers… Ministry of Justice to expand Supreme Prosecutors' Office NDFC
According to legal sources on the 26th, the Ministry of Justice is pushing ahead with an NDFC expansion on the parking lot site opposite the annex of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office building in Seocho District, Seoul. It will be built with three underground floors and six aboveground floors, and the total project cost is about 53 billion won. Although the groundbreaking schedule has not been finalized, construction is expected to begin as soon as a contract is signed with a bidder selected through competitive tender. The construction period is slated for about three years.
The NDFC houses the Supreme Prosecutors' Office forensics division's Digital Investigation Division, the Cyber and Technology Crime Investigation Division, the Forensic Science Analysis Division, and the DNA and Chemical Analysis Division, among others. It is where various scientific evidence needed for investigations and trials—such as digital forensics as well as DNA, video, document, and psychological analyses—is examined and analyzed. According to the Prosecutors' Yearbook, in 2024 alone there were 10,063 requests for DNA, document, psychological, and video analysis and examination.
The biggest reasons for the expansion are aging facilities and a lack of space. The NDFC building was built in 2008. As demand for evidence analysis such as forensics has increased, personnel and equipment have grown, but there is reportedly insufficient space to accommodate them.
A prosecution official said, "There is so little space to place servers at the NDFC that we even temporarily converted an underground parking lot into a server room." The prosecution explained that expansion is urgent because facilities are also needed to safely store various chemicals used for evidence analysis.
◇ "Busan roundhouse kick, Jang Yoon-gi cases" truth uncovered, but... ruling party says "forensics division should be downsized"
In contrast to the expansion of NDFC facilities, the future of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office forensics division that uses them is uncertain. With the abolition of the prosecution's investigative authority coming in October, some in the ruling camp are arguing that the forensics division's functions should be transferred to the police or the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency.
Park Eun-jung, a Rebuilding Korea Party lawmaker, said at the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee full session on the 21st that "leaving the prosecution's forensic function in the Public Prosecution Service as is could raise suspicions that there will later be attempts to restore investigative authority."
In legal circles, a counterargument is that investigative authority and the function of analyzing scientific evidence are separate issues. Even if prosecutors do not conduct direct investigations, independent appraisal and analysis capabilities for evidence are needed to decide whether to indict and to maintain the prosecution in court.
There have been cases where the forensics division's analysis uncovered facts not identified in prior investigations. The 2022 "Busan roundhouse kick case" is a prime example. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office forensics division conducted detailed examinations of 121 parts including the victim's jeans and underwear, and succeeded in finding the assailant's DNA on the inside thigh of the jeans.
In the "Jang Yoon-gi case," the murder of a Gwangju high school girl, the forensics division improved the quality of CCTV footage and found an important lead. They confirmed a scene showing Jang Yoon-gi approaching the victim with a rear car door left open, and prosecutors used this to specifically establish the purpose of abduction.
A senior-level prosecutor said, "Whether to request supplementary investigation by the police ultimately can only be decided after analyzing the evidence," adding, "The need to verify scientific evidence does not disappear just because investigative authority is gone."
◇ If evidence disputes increase at trial… forensics division's role likely to grow
The forensics division's role is not confined to the investigation stage. This is because defendants often dispute the probative value of digital evidence or DNA during trial. Courts are also commissioning the NDFC to appraise whether photos, texts, and videos submitted during proceedings have been manipulated or are artificially synthesized by artificial intelligence (AI).
On the contrary, some predict that if the prosecution's authority to order supplementary investigations disappears in October, demand for verification of scientific evidence will increase at the trial stage. Now, additional verification of evidence is possible through reappraisal or detailed appraisal during the prosecution's supplementary investigation process, but going forward, disputes over the authenticity of evidence may unfold during trial.
The Supreme Court's National Court Administration also expressed concern in its opinion on the amended Criminal Procedure Act submitted to the National Assembly last month, saying, "If the investigation and examination of evidence in court are carried out more thoroughly, the time required for hearings may increase."
Ho Seung-jin, a managing attorney at HyeMyung Law who previously headed the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Digital Investigation Division, said, "What matters most in evidence appraisal is not efficiency but accuracy, objectivity, and minimizing errors," adding, "An appraisal function capable of independently cross-checking the analysis results produced by investigative agencies must remain within the Public Prosecution Service to enable checks and balances in the criminal justice process."