Score 1 for ahistoricity: North Korea has always had a conscript army and had no ‘volunteer army nationals’ to exchange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_North_Korea#History

(Open to changing this if citations are provided to the contrary, will accept proof via the Puzzler if the author wishes to preserve their anonymity)

Score 2 as unlike Josh I believe there were some volunteers in the army fighting on the North Korean side, but this acronym is nonetheless deceptive.

Score 3 - I’m not versed well enough in history to call whether this is accurate or not, but I’ll factor the above comments in while also saying that the acronym itself seems just fine.

Posting on behalf of a Wordsmith who wishes to remain anonymous:

https://www.ospreypublishing.com/uk/osprey-blog/2024/chinese-volunteers-in-the-korean-war-1950-53/

Volunteer Army being a proper noun improves the historicity and appropriateness but also earns a proper noun penalty. No net effect on my scoring.

I think it ups it for me. Score 2.