Should National Museum of Korea start charging admission again?

Visitors crowd the main hall of the National Museum of Korea in central Seoul, Dec. 14, 2025. Newsis

After the National Museum of Korea (NMK) reached a new milestone in 2025, welcoming more than 6.5 million visitors in a single year, a long-simmering question has resurfaced: Should the country’s flagship museum begin charging admission again?

Currently, the museum’s permanent galleries are open free of charge. Until 2008, visitors paid a 2,000 won admission fee, but under the Lee Myung-bak administration, fees at the NMK and all other state-run museums nationwide were abolished as part of a broader push to expand the public’s access to culture.

Nearly two decades on, that policy is once again under review. According to the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the government is considering reintroducing admission fees as early as 2027, starting with the NMK. Under the proposal, adult tickets would likely cost around 5,000 won, with discounts offered to students and low-income groups.

Opinion remains divided. At a ministry briefing last month, President Lee Jae Myung weighed in on the issue, stating that “when something is free, it can feel less precious, almost cheapened.”

A similar view was voiced at a recent seminar hosted by the Korean Museum Association. Kim Young-ho, honorary president of the Korean Society of Museum Studies, argued that paying even a modest entry fee can shape how citizens perceive their cultural institutions.

“When people pay to enter, they begin to assign value to their own culture. The revenue generated can then be reinvested in exhibition quality and the visitor experience.”

Others point to worsening congestion inside the galleries, suggesting that paid admission could function as a form of crowd control as visitor numbers continue to rise.

A visitor browses the National Museum of Korea's gift shop, Dec. 30, 2025. Yonhap

Calls for caution are just as strong.

“The NMK’s collection consists of cultural heritage owned and managed by the state and it carries the character of a shared public good that all citizens have the right to enjoy,” Yang Ji-yeon, a professor of curatorial studies and art management at Dongduk Women’s University, told The Korea Times.

There are also structural constraints that further complicate the debate. Under the National Finance Act, the museum is funded entirely by the central government and any revenue it generates is returned to the national treasury. Even if admission fees were reinstated, the museum would not be able to use the proceeds directly.

“If entry fees are introduced, how that revenue is ultimately used becomes a crucial issue,” said Choi Seon-ju, professor of museology at Chung-Ang University and former director of the Gyeongju National Museum. He added that legal grounds would first need to be established or reviewed to determine whether museums can reinvest earnings into their own operations.

Another concern is the ripple effect. If the NMK moves to paid admission, other state-run museums will likely have to follow, raising fears about the impact on regional institutions.

“Local museums already struggle with lower visitor numbers compared to those in Seoul,” Choi said. “If they start charging admission, attendance could drop even further.”

Some experts argue that alternative funding models should be explored before turning to ticketing. Yang pointed to the need for more robust sponsorship systems. “Building a flexible framework that allows museums to more actively and sustainably secure corporate sponsorships or private donations could be a meaningful step.”

Others emphasize what may be lost if museums move away from free access.

“By keeping museums free, we reinforce their public nature,” said Kim Soo-jin, an art historian and research professor at Sungkyunkwan University. “It sends a clear message to students and international visitors alike that Korea is a nation that treats its history and culture as something the state actively supports.”

Because the museum is funded entirely by public money, Kim added, its financial base is relatively stable. This sets it apart from many institutions overseas, where mounting a blockbuster exhibition often requires securing funding in advance, thus placing financial considerations at the center of curatorial decision-making.

“If we move toward a system where revenue from admission fees begins to affect exhibition quality, curatorial direction or staffing, that is not a future I would welcome,” she said.