Auditors and audited companies enter into audit contracts under audit fees, which are the agreed-upon compensation for audit services, while maintaining independence. Under the free appointment system, audit fees, like general economic goods, should be determined at the point where the audit input cost, which can be represented by audit input hours, and the benefits obtained from being audited reach mutual equilibrium. However, in Korea, a uniform audit fee structure based on the asset size of the audited company is currently being used. The current audit fee structure based on asset size has been criticized as potentially irrational compared to those of other countries. However, given the characteristics of the Korean audit market, it can be argued that risk-compensatory factors, rather than audit input costs, play the primary role in pricing audit services, unlike general economic goods. This is because an audit fee structure based solely on actual audit input hours, while simply overlooking the environmental variables of the audit market, could potentially lead to audit market failure. The risk-compensatory nature of Korea's audit fee structure can be evaluated as a practically valid system when considering the actual circumstances of auditors, auditees, and audit users. Going forward, it will be necessary to enhance auditors' ethical awareness and increase the utilization level of audit reports in order to promote the development of the audit system.