로그아웃 하시겠습니까?

  • 주제별 국가전략
  • 전체

One law sets South Korea’s AI policy—and one weak link could break it

(하나의 법으로 규정된 한국의 인공지능 정책과 그 취약 요인)
□ 미국 정보기술혁신재단(ITIF)은 지난 29일 발간한 「One Law Sets South Korea’s AI Policy—and One Weak Link Could Break It (하나의 법으로 규정된 한국의 인공지능 정책과 그 취약 요인)」 보고서에서 '내년 1월 시행 예정인 대한민국의 인공지능(AI) 기본법이 규제 부문에서 한국의 글로벌 경쟁력 확보를 저해할 수 있다'고 밝힘

□ 보고서는 AI 기본법에 대해 '세계 최초로 AI 전략, 산업 진흥, 규제를 하나로 결합한 사례로, 장단점을 동시에 증폭하는 구조적 특성을 지닌다'고 진단함 
 ㅇ 이어 '데이터 인프라, 집적단지 조성, 인재 양성, 국제화 전략에 이르는 산업 진흥 조항은 체계적이고 미래지향적으로 설계돼있으며, 향후 다른 국가들이 참고할 수 있는 정책적 모범이 될 잠재력이 있다'고 평가함

□ 반면 규제 부문에 대해서는 AI 위험 진단이 부정확하다고 비판함. 보고서는 '지나치게 포괄적인 AI 정의, 경직된 연구개발(R&D) 의무, 중소기업 우선 규칙 등은 한국이 글로벌 경쟁력을 확보하는 데 필요한 규모와 유연성을 저해할 수 있다'고 우려함
 ㅇ 또 '컴퓨팅 임곗값, 투명성 라벨링 요건, '고영향 AI' 지정 등 프로세스 중심의 보고 의무는 기업에 실질적 책임성을 부과하기보다 행정적 부담만 늘리고 자원 낭비로 이어질 가능성이 크다'고 덧붙임 

□ ITIF는 개선 과제로 ▲ 컴퓨팅 임계값 삭제 및 배포 이후 성과 기반 감독 전환 ▲ 과태료 부과 전 유예기간 도입을 통한 시정 기회 부여 ▲ '고영향 AI' 기준의 성과 기반 체계로의 재설계 등을 제시함
 ㅇ 아울러 AI 정의를 명확히 하고, 위원회의 권한은 전략 중심으로 재편하되 위험별 규제 권한은 부처 전문성에 따라 배분해야 한다고 권고함
 ㅇ 또한 과학기술정보통신부가 유연한 연구개발(R&D) 로드맵을 설계하고, 기업의 규모와 관계없이 적용할 수 있는 지원 체계를 마련할 필요가 있다고 강조함. 국내외 기업을 차별 없이 규율하고 데이터 요구는 필요성과 비례성, 기밀성의 원칙에 기반해야 바람직하다고도 덧붙임

□ 보고서는 '법령을 강화하고 최종 시행령을 통해 위험 기반, 성과 중심의 균형 잡힌 규칙을 시행하면 글로벌 경쟁력에서 지속적인 우위를 확보할 것'이라고 전망함

 
[출처] 미국 싱크탱크 '한국 AI 기본법, 규제가 경쟁력 위협' (2025.09.30.) / 연합뉴스
[한국어 번역본] 통합적 접근의 명암: 한국 AI 기본법의 전략·진흥·규제 구조와 규제 리스크 (2025.09.29.) / Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF)

목차

Title page 1

Contents 2

KEY TAKEAWAYS 1

INTRODUCTION 3

OVERVIEW OF THE ACT 6

CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS 7

Analysis: The Definition of an AI System Is Too Broad 8

Recommendation 9

CHAPTER 2: GOVERNANCE FOR SOUND AI DEVELOPMENT AND TRUST 9

Analysis: Keep the Master Plan, Lose the Master Regulator 10

Recommendation 10

CHAPTER 3: POLICIES FOR AI DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRY PROMOTION 10

Innovation Polices to Support South Korea's AI Industry 10

Analysis: South Korea's Prescriptive Innovation Policies Risks Stifling AI 11

Recommendations 12

Industrial Policies to Support South Korea's AI Industry 12

Analysis: Industrial Policy Measures Should Be Size-Neutral 13

Recommendations 14

CHAPTER 4: AI ETHICS AND TRUSTWORTHINESS 14

Soft-Law, AI Safety-Oriented Measures 14

Hard-Law, Regulatory Obligations for AI 14

Analysis: A Light-Touch Vision for AI Governance Undone by Heavy-Handed Rules 15

Recommendations 17

CHAPTER 5: SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS 18

Analysis: Broad Data Demands Risk Regulatory Overreach 18

Recommendation 19

CHAPTER 6: PENALTIES 19

Analysis: Penalties Should Be Proportionate to Risk and Harm 19

Recommendations 19

CONCLUSION 19

APPENDIX: AI ACT SUMMARY 20

Chapter 1: General Provisions (총칙) 20

Chapter 2: Promotion System for the Sound Development and Trust-Based Foundation of AI (인공지능의 건전한 발전과 신뢰 기반 조성을 위한 추진체계) 20

Chapter 3: AI Technology Development and Industry Promotion (인공지능기술 개발 및 산업 육성) 21

Chapter 4: AI Ethics and Trustworthiness (인공지능윤리 및 신뢰성 확보) 21

Chapter 5: Supplementary Provisions (보칙) 22

Chapter 6: Penalties (벌칙) 22

Addenda (부칙) 22

ENDNOTES 24

Tables 7

Table 1. Summary of key definitions from South Korea's AI Framework Act 7

해시태그

#AI규제 # AI기본법 # AI거버넌스

관련자료

AI 100자 요약·번역서비스

인공지능이 자동으로 요약·번역한 내용입니다.

One law sets South Korea’s AI policy—and one weak link could break it

(하나의 법으로 규정된 한국의 인공지능 정책과 그 취약 요인)