The Ministry of Justice has revised the existing "law concerning the execution of criminal punishment" in the way that enhanced human rights for inmates and their ability for reintegration. To fulfil this goal, the authority changed the title of the law to "the Law concerning correctional facilities and the treatment for inmates and waited for legislative process. In the same context, the corrections bureau in the Ministry recently announced "The Strategic Plan for the Changes in Correctional Administration" to show its committment for innovation. This article reviewed the contents of the new law and the strategic plan, and then pointed out some limitations of these efforts. When it comes to the new law-The law concerning correctional facilities and the treatment for inmates, the contents of the law did not reach the expectation, first because there are too many exceptions that breach the basic human rights of inmates and second, the law did not make any efforts or policies to enhance the adapatability of inmates into a wider society compulsory. Instead, it allow authorities use discretionary power. As far as the Strategic Plan is concerned, it seems too idealistic. In other words, many proposed plan is hard to achieve in reality. Therefore I suggested some alternative ideas such as developing correctional programs for short-time inmates, improving living conditions in facilities, linking classification system and progressive treatment system, and increasing parolees by utilizing the probation system.

This thesis deals with some problems on the revision of current The Penal Execution Act. By the draft for revision, made public by the ministry of justice, the purpose of revision-draft comprises some principles of prohibition of illegitimate discrimination of prisoners, strengthening the right of presumption of innocence of the convicted, rationalization and individualization of the correctional programs, widening the chances of consulting with relating professionals about the prison administration especially corrections, classification and assignment of facilities in our national penitentiaries' system, recommendation of some high tech security equipment. To the public, corrections are generally understood that the purpose of corrections is to carry out the sentence of the court, with various correctional components handling specific types of sentences. Some components are devoted to providing pretrial services for those entering the criminal justice system. Other components, such as jails, handle individuals of both pre-and post conviction status. The majority of correctional components deal with persons who have appeared before the court and have been found guilty of one or more crimes. Corrections refers to the programs, services, agencies, institutions responsible for supervising persons charged with or convicted of crimes. A paradigm is a model or a way of viewing an aspect of life such as education, politics, medicin, the criminal system. A paradigm shift can make a new way of thinking about a given subject, corrections. Recently paradigm shift recommended for corrections include doing justice, promoting secure communities, restoring crime victims and noncriminal options. Finally, we come to the conclusion that revision of the Penal Execution Act seeks to use a balanced approach involving offenders, victims, local communities and government in alleviating crime and violence and peaceful communities.

The fundamental purpose of modern correctional treatment can be to surely make convicts return to society through individualization of treatment. However, it seems individualization of treatment may not be so helpful for convicts in returning to society unless it is the most appropriate and rational individual treatment that considers their property and character on the basis of exact understanding on each convict. Especially, as individual personality and property is emphasized and persons with different view of life, view of world and sense of value are living together nowadays, it seems almost impossible to return convicts to society merely through individualization of treatment, ignoring the fact that ‘proper sphere of character’ exists. Thus, seeking the method of correctional treatment appropriate to the age of individualization like the present time seems to be the most important task of modern correctional administration. The concept of individualization of treatment can be said to be established on the basis of ‘rational sense of human being’ that has ruled so far since the 17th century. Rational sense of human being may be image of human being that overlooks the fact that ‘proper sphere of character’ unique to each person obviously exists by grasping human being merely with abstract concept that human being is 'free and rational individual.' However, returning convicts to society through individualization of treatment based on rational sense of human being will be inevitably subject to regular limit. Therefore, it seems that so-called ‘personification of treatment’ is necessary which is based on the premise that each person has ‘proper sphere of character’ in the age of individualization like the present time. Needless to say, it may not be so easy to clearly define what ‘personification of treatment’ is and what it should be. Thus, it may be necessary to first find method to secure conversation and trust between characters or between individual character and community (society or correction authorities) before defining the concept of ‘personification of treatment.’ It is true that the correctional treatment has treated convicts not as ‘principal of correction’ or ‘partner of conversation’ but as ‘object of correction’ or ‘object of treatment’ thus far. I think that this is why so-called ‘personification of treatment’ is not realized which considers the property and character of convicts, based on the exact understanding on each of them. Therefore, in order to efficiently achieve the purpose of returning convicts to society in the present time, it is required to recognize convicts as ‘principal of correction’ or ‘partner of conversation’ and to enforce ‘personification of treatment’ on the basis of the fact that they also have ‘proper sphere of character.’