감사인의 주기적 변경이 보고이익의 조정과 가치관련성에 미치는 영향

This study aims to examine the effects of the periodic auditor designation introduced in Korea in 2020. It investigates whether there are differences in earnings management and the value relevance of accounting figures between firms with periodic designation and those without. Under Periodic Designation of Auditors, listed companies that have been audited by the same auditor for six consecutive years are required to be audited by an auditor designated by the regulatory authority for the following three years. This rule is based on the premise that prolonged audits by the same auditor may impair auditor independence. However, the duration of continuous audits itself may not be directly related to earnings quality or audit quality. Therefore, the effects of Periodic Designation of Auditors remain controversial and require empirical investigation. The sample used in this study consists of 2,104 firm-year observations from non-financial listed companies with a December year-end between 2020 and 2022, of which 212 samples are subject to periodic auditor designation. Earnings management was measured using discretionary accruals based on the Dechow and Dichev (2002) model. The value relevance was verified using the firm valuation model with accounting figures from Ohlson (1995). According to the empirical analysis, periodic designation of auditors did not affect earnings management or the value relevance of earnings. Periodic designation of auditors conveys the information that the auditor’s tenure has ended. Since such information is known to market participants, it may help constrain opportunistic behavior by firms or auditors. Whether this reflects the system’s effectiveness can be verified through future research with more data.