While I do not defend any judging in Sochi I feel compelled to point out how ridiculous it is for Korea to send their actual VP of KSU four years earlier to Vancouver and then four years later cry foul when Russia sends the wife of one. You can't make this crap up. The whole thing is a comedy show.
Eh. Realistically, unless figure skating is a lot bigger than I imagine it to be, it's pretty much impossible to remove conflict of interest or other potential shenanigans from judging when selecting the judging panel. Either the judge is from a relatively large (i.e. well-represented) federation in which case there will likely be a skater from the judge's own country (obvious conflict of interest), or the judge is from a smaller federation without a skater in which case he would undoubtedly receive pressure for favorable judging from other federations for a quid pro quo.
The important issue is that regardless of wherever the judges are from, they should apply the established rules for judging accurately and evenly. If there is evidence that some skaters were unfairly penalized or miraculously had a string of nearly all +3 GOEs at Vancouver, or one or more of the judges were significantly looser/harsher than the others on certain skaters, then by all means bring it up. Conflict of interest does not necessarily mean that judges will be corrupt or unfair in their scoring -- but when there
are significant judging deviations from the established rules, especially when it's enough to affect the skater rankings, then conflict of interest
does become a prime consideration. If there weren't significant judging deviations at Vancouver, then it means that despite conflicts of interest, the judges still maintained their objectivity, and there's no need to protest (i.e. no cause). Such was not the case at Sochi.
Although a lot of the attention has been on which federations the judges are from, I think that attention is sort of misplaced (sort of like saying that Adelina won because she had a more technical skate -- which completely papers over how the judging influences the scores, else Mao would've won the FS). The attention should be on
whether or not there were any judging inconsistencies. Unfortunately, because the system is specifically set up so that judging is anonymous and the given avenue for protesting is difficult (filing the protest within half an hour of an event), making it difficult for the judging to be reviewed, I think it's likely that the Koreans have little other recourse but to ask for the composition of the judging panel to be reviewed in lieu of the judging itself. I'm sure they would much more prefer that the judges publicly document why the scores were given the way they were, but it seems like the system is set up specifically to avoid accountability.