Administrative Scrivener Examination: Score Breakdown and Subject-Specific Results. A Reflection After the Results Announcement.

January 28, 2026. The results for the 2025 Administrative Scrivener Examination were announced, and I am happy to say I passed! 🌸

Now that the official notification has arrived and I have confirmed the score breakdown, I can finally reflect on the results calmly.

I wanted to see how much of a gap there was between how I felt during my studies and my actual scores, and which subjects contributed to my passing.
There were several things I only realized after looking at the numbers, such as my self-scoring and the scores written on the postcard.

I will organize and write down what I learned from the score breakdown and my thoughts now that the results have been announced.

My Score Breakdown

The scores listed on the official notification are as follows.

Total Score

• 5-Choice Multiple Choice: 152 points

• Multiple-Answer Choice: 16 points

• Descriptive: 26 points

Total: 194 points

Since the passing score was 180 points or higher, I passed with a margin of 14 points.

Next, the subject-specific breakdown compared with my self-scoring is as follows.

5-Choice Multiple Choice (152 points)

• Foundations of Law: 4 points (1/2 questions)

• Constitution: 20 points (5/5 questions)

• Administrative Law: 68 points (17/19 questions)

• Civil Law: 24 points (6/9 questions)

• Commercial Law: 0 points (0/5 questions)

• Basic Knowledge: 36 points (9/14 questions)

Multiple-Choice (16 points)

• Constitutional Law: 4 points (2/4 items)

• Administrative Law ①: 4 points (2/4 items)

• Administrative Law ②: 8 points (4/4 items)

Descriptive (26 points)

Since the breakdown for the descriptive section is difficult to understand, I have listed the scores from the postcard as they are.

Subject-Specific Reflections

Looking at the results, I feel that they turned out exactly as I had planned in my strategy. I was able to score points in the areas I focused on, and I could not answer the questions where my study was insufficient.
(Furthermore, the strategy I considered is summarized in 'My Subject-Specific Strategy and Time Allocation for Taking the Administrative Scrivener Exam via Self-Study'.)

Here, I will reflect by dividing them into three categories: Legal Multiple-Choice, Descriptive, and Basic Knowledge.

Legal Multiple-Choice (152 points/244 points)

In order to make them a source of points, I focused my studies on Administrative Law and Civil Law.

As expected, Administrative Law was the subject where I scored the most points.
Because I repeatedly read the articles and judicial precedents aiming for a perfect score, I think I was able to solve them consistently.

In the end, I missed 2 questions in the 5-choice multiple-choice section, so I could not get all questions correct.
Even so, the time I spent studying made it a subject that functioned as a source of points. I feel that my strategy itself was not wrong.

For Civil Law, I got 6/9 questions, and the result was generally as expected. I studied with the intention of firmly grasping typical issues, so I did not miss anything significantly.

My goal was 7/9 questions, so the fact that I fell one question short is a point for reflection. However, I did not miss them due to extremely difficult questions, so I think the result was commensurate with my ability.

For Constitutional Law, I got all questions correct in the 5-choice multiple-choice section, which was better than expected.
I think it was good that I studied focusing on past exam questions and judicial precedents.

And, Commercial Law was a surprising 0 points...
I could not answer questions I had never seen before, nor the question about company incorporation.
It was a complete lack of preparation.

I spent a lot of time on Administrative Law and Civil Law, and I studied Constitutional Law focusing on past questions and judicial precedents.
I feel that by spending time and studying thoroughly, I was able to make them a source of points.

I also felt that I had studied Commercial Law to some extent.
I had hoped to get 2 out of 5 questions correct.

However, the result was 0 points. The cause was a lack of deep understanding.
I have realized painfully that the Administrative Scrivener Exam is not easy enough to pass just by 'thinking' you have studied.

Descriptive Questions (26/60 points)

For the descriptive section, I prepared using the 'Gokaku Kakumei' descriptive workbook, the 'Gokaku Dojo' descriptive questions, mock exams, and past questions.
However, to be honest, I think the amount of practice was clearly insufficient.

For Question 44 (Administrative Law), although I first wrote 'lawsuit for revocation of a determination,' I was swayed and rewrote it as 'lawsuit for declaratory judgment of invalidity' because I had written that the 'defect was serious and obvious.'
The phrase 'inherent defect of the determination' did not come to mind at all.

The only keyword I was able to write was 'with Y City as the defendant.'
My estimated score is 0–4 points.

Question 45 (Civil Law). I had re-solved the 'Gokaku Kakumei' descriptive workbook the day before the exam, but I never expected almost the same question to appear!
On the day, I regretted not memorizing it word for word, but I still think I was able to write an answer almost identical to the correct example.

The keywords I was able to write were 'daily household matters' and 'justifiable grounds for believing.'
My estimated score is 16–18 points.

For Question 46 (Civil Law), I was able to write the keyword 'management of business,' but I had no idea about the rest.

The only keyword I was able to write was 'management of business.'
My estimated score is 4–8 points.

The descriptive grading from two prep schools (LEC and TAC) was 28 points, so there was no major discrepancy. Prep schools are truly amazing.

While I barely earned any points on Question 44, I was able to gain solid points on Question 45, which I believe is why I ended up with 26 points overall.
I realized that for descriptive questions, it is important to accumulate partial points even if you cannot write a perfect answer.

Basic Knowledge (36/56 points)

I chose a strategy of not focusing much on politics and economics, and instead ensuring points in the Administrative Scrivener Act, Family Register Act, Basic Resident Register Act, information and communications/personal information protection, and reading comprehension.In particular,
I practiced with the intention of solving reading comprehension first on the day of the exam,while being mindful of time allocation.

The result was 36 points (9/14 questions). I cleared the passing threshold (24 points), but I think I could have increased my score more if I had studied politics and economics a little more.
Looking at the prep school grading results, my basic knowledge score was below the average, so it is clear that my preparation was insufficient.

This time, by scoring according to the strategy I set in advance, I was able to avoid the threshold cutoff as a result.
I feel once again that basic knowledge is the foundation for passing stably.

My failures in retrospect are summarized in 'Things I think I failed at by attempting the Administrative Scrivener Exam through self-study.' Please take a look at this as well if you like.

What I learned from the results

The passing score for the Administrative Scrivener Exam is 180 points.
My score was 194 points, giving me a margin of 14 points.

What supported these 14 points was undoubtedly Administrative Law, Civil Law, and Constitutional Law.

The results for the 5-choice multiple-choice questions were 17/19 for Administrative Law, 6/9 for Civil Law, and 5/5 for Constitutional Law.
I believe the results reflect the fact that I spent a lot of time on Administrative Law, firmly grasped typical issues in Civil Law, and carefully studied past questions and judicial precedents for Constitutional Law.

For basic knowledge as well, I was able to secure points in the areas I focused on, such as various laws and reading comprehension.

The strategy of ensuring I got the questions right that everyone else gets right is what I believe ultimately supported my passing.

On the other hand, I scored 0 in Commercial Law and Corporate Law.
I was also unable to answer almost any of the Politics and Economics questions correctly.

The total point allocation for these is over 40 points, which is by no means a small amount. However, since I was able to cover it with other subjects, I was ultimately able to exceed the passing line.

However, this was only possible because I had scored well enough in the main subjects, and it does not mean that it was okay to neglect Commercial Law or Politics and Economics.

Looking back, I think my strategy waswalking a very dangerous tightrope.

I was able to score points in Administrative Law, Civil Law, Constitutional Law, and the various laws of basic knowledge that I studied intensively, but I could not score points in Commercial Law, Corporate Law, and Politics and Economics, which I only studied to a certain extent.
It was a strategy as planned, but if I had missed even a few more questions in the main subjects, there is a possibility that I would have failed.

Furthermore, regarding the descriptive section,a miracle occurred where the questions in the 'Goukaku Kakumei' workbook were almost exactly the same as the ones on the exam.
Without Question 45, my score for the descriptive section would have been much lower.

You could say I was lucky.

If I had studied Commercial Law, Corporate Law, and Politics and Economics a little more, I think I could have passed more comfortably.

While it is necessary to prioritize your studies when self-studying with limited time, I realized that discarding too much is also dangerous.

Reflections on looking back

Looking at the score breakdown, what I think again is thatmy strategy was not wrong, but I had almost no margin for error.

Spending time on priority subjects and ensuring I get the questions right that everyone else gets right. I think this policy itself was correct. In fact, being able to score consistently in Administrative Law, Civil Law, and Constitutional Law led to my passing.

However, looking at the results of 0 points in Commercial Law and Corporate Law and being unable to answer almost any Politics and Economics questions correctly, I also feel that I should have balanced it a bit more. Even for the descriptive section, without the miracle of Question 45, the situation would have been quite dire.

Precisely because I am self-studying, I must constantly think about how to use my limited time.

It is because it is impossible to perfect everything that it is necessary to set priorities. Even so, the scores clearly showed me that discarding too much is dangerous.

Looking at the score breakdown, I was able to reflect on my own studies once again.
I would be happy if this could be of any help to those who will be taking the exam in the future.

Thank you for reading until the end.

I will continue to update my experiences regarding studying for the Administrative Scrivener Exam on my note magazine, "Study Records Until Passing the Administrative Scrivener Exam".

I would be happy if you could like and follow me!