I think this is a consequence -- and flaw -- of the IJS. The scoring system pushes the judges to pile on the points for the person that they thought skated the best.
Take Patrick Chan, for instance. Under 6.0, if you were a judge you might decide that overall, despite the errors, Patrick skated the best and deserved to win. So you give him your first-place ordinal. All straightforward and aboveboard. If other judges disagree, so be it. You have done all you can.
But with the CoP, if you think Patrick skated the best and deserves to win, then you have to make sure it comes out that way by your marks. Who knows how the points will eventually tally up, with all the pluses and minus. So if you are firm in your conviction, your only option is to toss a bunch of +2's and 9.5s into the mix.
In the case of a dominant performance like Kim's, this results in a 20-point win instead of 10.
So we agree the lead shouldn't be so big?
And btw. it's probably the best justification I've read. You may be right - judges feel they have to do everything to make skater X win, so they give higher marks here and there...