[Market Pulse] Tesla FSD Approval Requires “Responsibility to Prove Safety”

'Verification capability' matters more than the 'pace of innovation'
Roll out in stages, starting with proven capabilities
Set up a monitoring system for after updates

A debate is raging across Europe and around the world over the driver-assistance system introduced by U.S. automaker Tesla, known as “supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD).” The issue has also surfaced in South Korea. At last month’s parliamentary audit, it was revealed that Tesla had applied for a special technical exemption in South Korea for the feature. This has raised questions for the government, the industry and society to consider.

The issue stems from the reality that a vehicle made by the same brand can offer different features and usage depending on where it is produced. The inconvenience and fairness concerns this creates for consumers are issues the government is expected to explain and address. But it would be nonsensical to base government policy decisions solely on the vehicle’s place of production. The review criteria should establish which features can be deployed on South Korean roads and who must prove their safety, using what evidence.

“Supervised FSD” is a driver-assistance feature that requires drivers to keep watching the road and intervene immediately when necessary. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) likewise described it as “Level 2” in its investigative documents. The fact that a car can steer, accelerate and decelerate on its own does not make the driver a passive passenger. The name FSD must not obscure or lead people to disregard the system’s limitations.

On April 10, 2026, the Netherlands Vehicle Authority (RDW) explained its approval of FSD and said that, at the time, it was valid only in the Netherlands. It also made clear that the U.S. and European versions of the software and features could not be compared on a one-to-one basis. This means that expanding authorization to individual European countries, obtaining approval across the European Union (EU), and deciding whether the system can be applied to vehicles produced in other countries, including South Korea, are separate processes.

The principle in European regulations that exemptions, too, require proof is worth learning from. Specifically, Article 39 of EU Regulation 2018/858 requires measures to ensure a level of safety equivalent to or higher than that under existing regulations, as well as test data to support those measures, for new technologies that do not comply with existing rules. The underlying principle is that an exemption should not create a space where standards are set aside; it should be a process for verifying safety by new means.

Tesla FSD Reversing in Action

Tesla FSD Detects Speeding Violations

South Korea also has legal avenues to consider. Article 114(13) of the Motor Vehicle Regulations provides for the recognition of safety standards under free trade agreements (FTAs), while Article 114(15) provides for the application of foreign standards to advanced and future-oriented vehicles recognized by the minister. Article 114-2 provides for exemptions concerning new devices. The existence of these provisions does not automatically mean FSD will be approved. The authorities must specify which standards will apply and what evidence will be used to determine whether the requirements have been met. The gaps in verification and disparities by place of production raised at the parliamentary audit should be taken as calls to clarify these review procedures. Now is the time to disclose which applications are under review, what supplementary materials are required, the testing plans and the decision schedule, rather than repeat the debate that preceded Tesla’s application for a special technical exemption. In particular, the government’s duty to explain and the company’s responsibility to prove the system’s safety must go hand in hand.

A look at the U.S. investigation “PE25012” offers a guide to what should be tested. It addresses issues such as running red lights and entering opposing lanes. The “EA26002” investigation, launched in March 2026, examines whether the system detects declines in perception performance when visibility deteriorates and alerts the driver in time. In South Korea, testing should verify how the car and driver respond in situations such as right-turn crosswalks, complex intersections, temporary construction lanes, backlighting and heavy rain. Before shifting responsibility for a driving failure to the person, we must measure whether that person has enough time to recognize the danger and take control. A warning that tells drivers to pay attention is not enough if the system requires supervision but gives them no time to supervise. Tesla’s claim that it has a low accident rate should also be scrutinized, starting with how that rate is calculated. We need to determine whether the figure covers miles driven with the feature engaged, whether accidents immediately after disengagement are included, and whether the road and weather conditions are comparable to those in ordinary driving. The fact that multiple media outlets cite the same data does not amount to more independent verification. The government and testing agencies must be able to examine the original data.

The solution is to introduce the system in stages, beginning with the capabilities verified through testing. The vehicles, software versions, permitted roads and features should be specified, and performance should continue to be monitored after updates. A system must also be established to restrict risky features and require corrective action on a legal basis. The same principles should apply to vehicles already on the road and to other domestic and foreign companies. Regulatory capacity to accommodate innovation should be judged not only by how quickly it allows new technology, but also by its ability to identify and address risks.

Ha Seong-yong, Professor of Smart Mobility Engineering at Joongbu University and Chairman of the Korea Society of Automotive Mobility Safety

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