The discussion of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in Korea dates back approximately ten years. Despite this short history, domestic research on OCB has achieved remarkable quantitative growth. However, regrettably, when viewed from an overall perspective, domestic OCB research has not achieved qualitative growth commensurate with this quantitative expansion. This can be confirmed by the fact that studies empirically addressing the antecedents of OCB constitute the mainstream of existing research output. Accordingly, the need has been raised for domestic OCB research to make a qualitative leap into new domains. This study critically examines domestic OCB-related research. Specifically, through comparison and review with foreign OCB research findings, this study critically organizes the deficiencies and excesses of domestic OCB research. In particular, the discussion of OCB is organized into three parts: conceptual aspects, substantive aspects, and methodological aspects. The discussion of conceptual aspects addresses content related to the conceptual definition and sub-dimensions of OCB; the discussion of substantive aspects organizes content related to the antecedents and outcomes of OCB. Finally, the discussion of methodological aspects addresses methodological issues that should be considered in conducting empirical research, namely measurement instruments, rating sources, and research design. Through critical discussion centered on these three aspects, this study provides an overview of domestic research trends on OCB and also suggests future research directions. When compared with foreign research, the characteristics of domestic OCB research can be summarized as follows. First, it can be pointed out that there are very few studies that critically or comprehensively examine the concept of OCB. The discussion of the conceptual aspects of domestic research is not only insufficient in quantity, but the studies that do discuss concepts are generally fragmentary and limited to organizing and introducing concepts. Most Korean studies follow Organ's (1988) definition of OCB, and the classification of OCB sub-dimensions also adopts the classification from foreign research without modification. In translating OCB, various terms such as "voluntary organizational behavior," "organizational citizenship behavior," "pro-organizational behavior," and "voluntary pro-organizational behavior" are used interchangeably, and the translation of OCB sub-dimensions is also not standardized. Second, in terms of substantive aspects, relatively diverse research findings have been accumulated. Examining the studies addressing substantive aspects, while there are rare theoretical studies that present only theoretical hypotheses or propositions, the majority are empirical studies that actually test hypotheses. As antecedents of OCB, job attitudes and leader behavior are the most frequently addressed factors, and dispositional factors such as personality are also addressed quite frequently. As outcomes of OCB, organizational performance has been primarily addressed, while individual performance has rarely been examined. Finally, looking at the methodological aspect, it can be said that a reasonably diverse range of research methods have been attempted. While the majority of empirical studies use the questionnaire method, it is noteworthy that longitudinal studies, meta-analyses, and laboratory experiments have also been conducted. This is notable because even in foreign contexts where considerable research on OCB has accumulated, the number of papers using such methodologies is not large. However, in the area of OCB measurement, there is still considerable room for improvement. With few exceptions, it can be pointed out that most studies translate and modify foreign measurement instruments without validity verification. Additionally, with few exceptions, most studies rely on self-report methods from a single rating source—employees—and the need to use multiple rating sources can also be noted.