[AI Rulemakers] "AI Is Racing Ahead While the National Assembly Walks"... Solutions from Nine Lawmakers of Both Parties

Relay Interview with 9 AI Experts from Both Parties

"AI Laws Must Be Revised at Least Annually... Ministry Barriers Should Be Removed"

Diverging Views on Sovereign AI Investment, Consensus on Applied AI

A More Pressing Issue Than Job Loss: Building Career Ladders for Youth

"Artificial intelligence (AI) is not merely the birth of a new technology, but rather a civilizational transformation. Whether or not we succeed in adapting to this transformation will determine the fate of not just individuals, but the nation as a whole." (Lee Kwangjae, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea)

"If we cling only to laws rooted in the past, we will inevitably end up just maintaining the status quo. Only by anticipating the future and crafting new laws accordingly can we move forward." (Ahn Cheolsoo, Member of the People Power Party)

"The first thing we must do in the age of AI is to loosen up the rigidity of our society. With the current approaches, neither employment, education, nor the budget can keep pace with the speed of change." (Lim Munyoung, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea)

"While I was in the private sector, it felt like traveling at 200 kilometers per hour. In the National Assembly, it feels as though we are following behind on a broken bicycle." (Ko Dongjin, Member of the People Power Party)

"We should precisely identify the areas of AI that require regulation and enforce it strictly there, while lifting restrictions in other domains." (Lee Haemin, Senior Presidential Secretary for AI Future Planning)

AI Generated Image

AI evolves at a pace measured in months, but government organizations, budgets, and legislation are still stuck in the past. Introducing a new service requires crossing the threshold of multiple ministries in succession, and by the time a law is enacted, the technology originally subject to regulation is already considered outdated in the market. As the private sector races to survive in global competition, criticisms have emerged that the government and National Assembly have yet to develop sufficient systems and expertise to support this speed.

To mark the inaugural year of the AI Framework Act, The Asia Business Daily met with nine "AI rule-makers" who have led AI-related legislation and policy over the past two months. These were Ahn Cheolsoo, Choi Hyungdu, Lee Kwangjae, Hwang Jeonga, Lim Munyoung, Lee Juhee, Yoo Yongwon, Ko Dongjin (in the order of their interviews), and Lee Haemin, Senior Presidential Secretary for AI Future Planning, who was a member of the Rebuilding Korea Party at the time of the interview.

Depending on their backgrounds in science, IT corporations, public administration, and national defense, each shared differing perspectives. Opinions also diverged on when, and to what extent, to apply regulations and on the investment priority for sovereign foundation AI models. Nevertheless, there was unanimous agreement that the government and National Assembly, if they continue to operate as they do now, will never match the pace of AI’s technological advance.

They also concurred that the composition of the National Assembly must change. To anticipate shifts in technology and industry and design appropriate preemptive systems, more scientists, business managers, and IT experts need to enter the Assembly. There were also proposals for the creation of a specialized legislative body able to comprehensively review and coordinate various AI-related bills currently scattered across standing committees.

(Photo from left) Ahn Cheolsoo, People Power Party Member of the National Assembly; Lee Haemin, Senior Presidential Secretary for AI Future Planning at the Blue House; Choi Hyungdoo, People Power Party Member of the National Assembly; Lee Kwangjae, Democratic Party Member of the National Assembly; Hwang Jeonga, Democratic Party Member of the National Assembly; Lim Munyeong, Democratic Party Member of the National Assembly; Lee Joohee, Democratic Party Member of the National Assembly; Yoo Yongwon, People Power Party Member of the National Assembly; Ko Dongjin, People Power Party Member of the National Assembly. Provided by The Asia Business Daily

In the Era of AI, Ministry Divisions Must Be Broken Down

Lee Haemin, Senior Presidential Secretary for AI Future Planning, recalled his time as a lawmaker promoting the AI Data Center Special Act (AIDC Act), during which he realized firsthand the siloed divisions between ministries with stakes in construction, electricity, environment, and more. "Getting the AI Data Center Act passed was like fighting a full-fledged war," he said, "Because ministry divisions were so entrenched, I had to battle every imaginable stakeholder."

Key provisions were omitted due to disagreements among ministries, and as a result, the bill passed the National Assembly "half-baked." While the relevant ministries subsequently worked to devise follow-up measures such as power supply, Lee pointed out that pushing forward with policies like AI infrastructure using the existing, ministry-centered structure faces inherent limitations.

Lim Munyoung, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, also diagnosed that the government’s current organization, which divides work among ministries, is not equipped to respond to new industries and businesses emerging in the AI age. One example is the "Korean-style Field-Deployed Engineer (K-FDE)" program, which dispatches young AI specialists to small and medium-sized business sites. Lim made his first legislative proposal the revision of the "Act on the Promotion of Industrial Digital Transformation and Utilization of Artificial Intelligence" to institutionalize K-FDE.

He stated, "Since the work of the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Employment and Labor, and Ministry of SMEs and Startups is all tangled together through the connection between small businesses, youth education and employment, and startups, it is difficult to classify any of it as the domain of a single ministry. Assigning each ministry its independent role as before and expecting them to simply run forward will not provide the solution," he said.

AI Laws Should Be Updated Annually... The Legislative Approach Must Change

Ahn Cheolsoo, Member of the People Power Party, stressed that regulations must not simply lag behind the rapid pace of AI technological development. Lawmakers, he argued, must proactively read trends in technology and industry and open up new pathways for innovation via legislation. "Looking at the United States, its Congress anticipates industrial and technological changes and proactively removes regulations that might impede innovation," he said. "If we keep clinging to outdated laws, we will have no choice but to keep things as they are. Only forward-looking laws will enable true progress."

He also emphasized that legislation must be continuously revised to keep pace with rapidly changing technologies. "The AI race is evolving so quickly that the rankings shift every month," he said, "so even the AI Framework Act must be revised at least once a year to keep pace with technological advances and avoid hampering industry." While updating the law every six months would be preferable, he argued, given the legislative realities of the National Assembly, yearly revisions are the minimum requirement.

Hwang Jeonga, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, argued not just for more frequent updates but for an entirely new regulatory approach. "For industries that are just starting out, regulating them from the outset is like tying sandbags to a marathon runner," she said. Hwang has proposed an amendment to the AI Framework Act that would suspend regulations on high-risk AI for three years. She argued that targeted regulations—so-called "pinpoint regulations"—should be applied only to truly high-risk areas, while companies that meet government standards should be relieved of some liabilities, and regulatory sandboxes expanded.

Yoo Yongwon, Member of the People Power Party, insisted that defense systems, too, must adapt to the speed of AI advancement. While the existing weapon system development and acquisition process is long and drawn out until all requirements are met, AI technologies change every few months. "We must move away from the old approach that made adoption impossible just because a solution fell short of the requirements by even 1%," he said. "If a solution can be used at even 80% of the targeted performance today, it should be deployed in the field and gradually improved toward the goal." Toward this end, he has proposed special laws for software-centered weapon systems and advanced defense capability projects.

Differing Opinions on Sovereign AI... Unanimity on Applied AI as the “Battleground”

Perspectives were divided regarding the development of sovereign foundation models, so-called “sovereign AI.” Ahn Cheolsoo noted, "We did not develop DOS or Windows, but used these to create Hangul, V3, and platforms like Naver and Daum." He argued Korea should prioritize open-source applied AI rather than compete with the United States or China in the scale of basic models.

By contrast, Lim Munyoung stressed, "The problem is not that we are investing too much in sovereign AI, but that we are investing far too little," seeing independent models as fundamental to national security and the domestic AI ecosystem. Ko Dongjin also asked, "What happens if foreign companies suddenly refuse to provide technological support?" and said the Lee Jaemyung government is right to pursue its own foundation model. He further suggested that the government select the most competitive models through phased evaluations and release them as open source so that the broader industry can utilize them together.

Divergences existed in setting investment priorities, but there was consensus that applied AI is where Korea's true competitive edge lies. Hwang Jeonga noted, "Real value will emerge from domain-specific AI," highlighting the synergy between expertise in medicine, defense, and other sectors and AI. Lee Kwangjae added, "Korea is stronger in applied technology than in basic research," and "By integrating AI with manufacturing, we can remain the world's dominant manufacturing power and develop globally competitive platforms in education, medicine, and culture as well."

Youth Career Disconnection Arrives Before Job Extinction

Choi Hyungdu, Member of the People Power Party, warned that excessive fear of AI taking over all jobs could result in overly restrictive regulations.

He referenced the UK's "Red Flag Act," which, upon the automobile's introduction, restricted vehicles from traveling faster than horse-drawn carriages in order to protect jobs for carriage drivers, but also stifled innovation in the car industry. Choi asserted, "Regulations on high-risk AI are important, but we cannot allow ambiguous fears about job losses to halt progress."

Lee Juhee, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, considered the more pressing issue to be the disappearance of first-stage career paths for youth, rather than large-scale elimination of jobs. "Seniors who can leverage AI will see their capabilities multiplied, as if they have multiple arms, but juniors struggle to even find entry-level work," she said. "We are already seeing situations where opportunities are denied before these young people have a chance to grow."

As AI takes over repetitive entry-level tasks, companies increasingly seek only experienced hires, depriving youth of opportunities to gain practical experience and hone their expertise. Lee argued that, rather than only responding after jobs disappear, we must design new career ladders so young people can safely transition into new roles and continue their professional growth.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.