정책 이슈

It is neither a right nor an automatic reward for effort. The gold medal at Toyota Stadium on the night of October 3, 2026, should have remained a record of the match. The Korean U-23 team defeated host Japan 1-0 to win their fourth consecutive Asian Games men's football title and seventh overall. The winning goal was scored by Um Ji-sung, and around twenty players, excluding three who had already completed their military service, earned the qualification to be incorporated as arts and sports personnel at that moment. Up to this point, it is the language of the game. It was immediately after that the record failed to lead to language of celebration. Captain Lee Ki-hyuk held up his gold medal and said, "I'm not going to the military," Yang Min-hyuk responded in a way that implied he played only for the reward of military exemption rather than the medal and trophy, and Park Seung-soo posted a photo of himself wearing a discharge cap in the locker room. An explanation followed that the cap was not something he brought himself but was thrown from the stands, and the next day, the captain and the Korea Football Association apologized. This is not an issue that can be simply dismissed with an apology.

전역모를 쓴 일은 출신의 해명과 무관하게 상징의 훼손이다. 근대국가의 대전제는 단순하다. 전쟁이 나면 국가를 위해 싸우고, 국가의 번영을 위해 세금을 낸다. 그 전제 위에서 국민은 통합된 시민이 되고 동일한 민족이 되며, 국가는 그 대가로 개인을 지킨다. 유대계 미국인 정치학자 한나 아렌트는 <인간의 조건>이라는 책에서 시민은 공동체를 지키기 위해서 전쟁을 할 준비가 있는 사람이아고 말했다. 복무와 납세는 사적 취향이 아니라 시민이 되는 조건이다. 그 조건의 표식을 금메달의 전리품처럼 쓰는 일은, 고대 그리스에서 신전을 훼손하거나 조선에서 조상을 모시는 신주단지에 오줌을 눈 일과 같은 결에 놓인다. 신전과 신주가 공동체의 신성함을 담았듯, 전역모는 그 의무를 이미 치른 사람의 표식이다. 의무를 피한 자리에서 그 모자를 기념 소품으로 쓰는 순간, 수신자에게 도착하는 문장은 하나다. 당신들의 18개월은 내가 피한 벌칙이었다.

Therefore, this issue cannot be simply overlooked. The purpose of punishment is not to condemn the character of a single athlete. It is to ensure that an exception remains an exception. Severe disciplinary action that the association can take, such as restricting eligibility for national representation, and public sanctions that question the political legitimacy of benefits, are possible. If there is no consequence for expressing the joy of exemption in official language and using the mark of service as a trophy, the next gold medal will be explained with the same sentence. If that consequence is not demanded, the resentment of young people who lost their ankles while working on landmines in the demilitarized zone will not be resolved. Military exemption and landmine accidents are two ends of the same generation. One receives a change in service type based on international competition results, while the other loses a body part while performing the same duty. If only gold medals are accumulated without balancing these two events, duty will only remain as a scene where it is imposed differently depending on the type of talent.

The letter of the law answers no to both. The arts and sports personnel guided by the Military Manpower Administration do not entail the extinguishment of military duty. They are supplementary service personnel who, after 4 weeks of basic military training, spend 34 months in their respective fields and complete 544 hours of public service utilizing their special skills. Although commonly referred to as 'exemption,' the accurate term is a change in the form of service. The criteria for inclusion are a top 3 finish in the Olympics or a 1st place finish in the Asian Games. The system's origin was not an individual right. After South Korea's performance lagged behind North Korea in the 1972 Munich Olympics, it was introduced in 1973 under the pretext of 'promoting national prestige.' The recognized competitions were once broad but significantly reduced after 1990, and the 2002 World Cup Round of 16 and the 2006 WBC Semifinals were briefly included but then removed again in 2008 due to fairness controversies. In 2018, it was even considered for abolition due to conflicts surrounding the selection of baseball national team members, but it was maintained based on the judgment that the annual number of inclusions was only dozens, so the military effect was small, but the morale-boosting effect was significant. In August 2026, the Military Manpower Administration announced that a plan to significantly reduce arts and sports personnel is being discussed as part of a review of the gradual reduction of supplementary service. This system is not a right open to everyone by the Constitution, but a policy lever that the state has attached to specific achievements. A lever goes down when the goal changes.

The saying that reward is proportional to effort is only half true. The victory in the final is clearly the result of effort. Despite being criticized for their completeness throughout the tournament, they achieved results in the final, and Yang Min-hyuk's final cross was part of that process. Not spending 18 months in the military during the early 20s, the peak of a player's career, is the difference between career discontinuity and continuity in sports with short prime periods. For Lee Ki-hyuk, that game was a reality with nine days left until enlistment. It is difficult to call it hypocrisy that military service issues motivate a player who travels between European and domestic stages. Fans, as they did in 2018 and 2022, have supported Asian Games football by overlapping 'gold medals' with 'solving the military service of resources that will lead to the A-team.' The fact that many of the congratulations poured into the community immediately after the victory mentioned military service first is simply the public disclosure of that common calculation.

However, reward is not a private possession automatically attached to the amount of effort. On the same night, other young people of the same age do not even have the track to enter that calculation. The vast majority of those subject to military service examinations are classified as active duty or supplementary service, and the door to becoming an arts or sports agent is open only to a very small number of Olympic medalists, Asian Games gold medalists, and designated art competitions. For young people who spend the same generation in factories and logistics centers, academies and research labs, and small and medium-sized enterprise production lines, the Asian Games final is an object of support, not an accessible competition. For them to turn military service into an 'opportunity to avoid it,' world-class physical capital, youth systems, luck, and the fact that the state has designated that sport as a policy target are simultaneously necessary. It is unfair to compare only the density of effort. Not because the day of a soccer prospect is not hard, but because the type of effort is pre-selected by the state. If the conditions for becoming a citizen are the same, the weight of those conditions must also be the same, regardless of the market price of talent.

The issue of money is intertwined here. Artistic and athletic personnel are not honorary positions without pay. Those incorporated into the system sign contracts with their affiliated clubs, compete in a market where transfer fees and salaries increase, and simultaneously fulfill the public service hours designated by the state. Park Seung-soo belongs to Newcastle, and Yang Min-hyuk belongs to Westerlo. A player who played 16 minutes in three games, or a player who performed poorly throughout the tournament but recorded an assist in the final, all fall under the same eligibility criteria under the current relaxed regulations. The market values talent, and the state adds a change in service form to the international performance of that talent. This is a double compensation. If this is to be called 'a natural reward for effort,' then it must be explained why this reward applies to gold medals in soccer, baseball, and swimming, but not to labor and academics of the same intensity, or to mine clearance. The old justification of promoting national prestige was persuasive in the Cold War report card of 1973. In 2026, when the professional market already values players at global standards, that justification becomes thin. The audience cheers at the Taegeukgi, but the party to the contract is the club.

Therefore, the place where this remark particularly resonated was not about malice. It was a place where young male public opinion was already sensitively heating up the inequality of military service. Arguments for conscripting women, abolishing artistic and athletic personnel, and debates over the fairness of alternative service are not new. The level of North Korean provocations and the tension in the DMZ area add a layer of security to this sensitivity. The fact that Assemblyman Ahn Cheol-soo criticized this behavior and spoke of reconsidering the Asian Games special exemption, and contrasted it with soldiers who lost their ankles to landmines, translates that sentiment into political language. This is also why a photo of someone wearing a discharge cap askew, regardless of the cap's origin, was interpreted as 'mimicking discharge.' Sharing the joy of not having to go to the military and using the symbols of those in the military as commemorative props are received differently by the audience. Just as temples and shrines protect the boundaries of a community, symbols of service also protect those boundaries. If boundaries are crossed with mockery, civic integration remains mere words.

The paradox also lies with the supporters. Fans who only watch soccer have long justified military service exemptions as extending a player's career. Even immediately after winning a gold medal, there were many 'congratulations on the exemption.' However, the moment the beneficiary articulates that calculation in the official language of the national team, even those who shared the calculation turn their backs. Fans may tolerate benefits as a means, but they do not tolerate a representative speaking of benefits as an end. National prestige remains the justification for the system, but the person's words erased that justification. An apology was necessary. Both the captain and the association acknowledged its weight. However, an apology does not change the structure. As long as junior representatives explain gold medals with the same sentences, the intensity of support will decrease, and the political lifespan of the exemption will shorten. The 2019 logic for maintaining the system, that its effect on military recruitment is small, is overturned the moment public opinion perceives it as 'mockery' rather than 'boosting morale.'

It is a door temporarily opened by the state for national prestige and competitiveness in sports, and to the majority who cannot stand before that door, it looks like a closed corridor. For athletes, it is the continuity of their livelihood and career, and for peers enlisting, it is a scene where the same duty is imposed differently depending on the type of talent. If both are not acknowledged simultaneously, this debate will always end in personal attacks. There is no need to belittle the efforts of athletes, nor to package the time of active duty as moral superiority. What is needed is the place of words and the place of institutions. The representative's mouth should speak of the weight of the game before the joy of the benefit, and the state must recalculate whether the justification from 1973 is still valid in the face of the market and military structure of 2026. That calculation must include the time of a young man who lost his ankle in a minefield with equal weight. If the joy of exemption and the scars of service do not meet within one generation, the statement that one becomes a citizen based on the premise of fighting and paying taxes becomes hollow. The condition of citizenship is to actively participate in politics that determines the fate of the community in the public square. The Asian Games military service privilege is the road to slavery.