Endless Debate Over Independence of Korean AI Models: Criticism Mounts as Government "Stands By"

Uncertainty Grows Over Achieving 'AI Technology Self-Reliance'
Government: "Evaluation Will Be Left to the Committee"... Evaluation Period Extended
Potential Impact of Licensing Fee Increases Must Be Considered

As debates continue over whether the government's 'independent AI foundation model' project can truly achieve technological self-sufficiency, controversies persist regarding participating companies' use of foreign technology.

Amid escalating controversy over the adoption of Chinese models, critics argue that the government's reliance on evaluation committee members without making any official statement is not only an evasion of responsibility, but could also lead to future disputes over fairness as the first round of eliminations is set to be decided soon.

Yonhap News Agency

On January 12, the Ministry of Science and ICT announced that it would extend the operation of the AI model sites-originally scheduled to close at 6 p.m. on January 9-to midnight on January 11, for the five consortia participating in the independent AI foundation model project. This means the site, which allows the expert evaluation panel to review each consortium's model, will remain open for an additional 54 hours. While the government stated, "The evaluation will be entrusted to expert reviewers," the extension of the evaluation period suggests that they are deliberating over the issue.

The Ministry of Science and ICT drew a line, stating, "This has nothing to do with the recent controversy over some consortia's independent technological capabilities." However, with three out of the five elite teams-Upstage, Naver Cloud, and SK Telecom-embroiled in controversy over their use of foreign open-source models, the government finds itself in a difficult position as the evaluation deadline approaches. Notably, this project is a mid- to long-term initiative running until 2027, with billions of dollars expected to be spent on NVIDIA GPUs, data support, and more.

Within the industry, although the controversy over the use of Chinese models is intensifying, the government has yet to issue any specific guidelines regarding the matter. They continue to adhere to the principle of respecting the judgment of the evaluation committee, which is composed of experts, relying on their conscience and expertise. A Ministry of Science and ICT official stated, "We provided the expert evaluation forms to the committee members in advance and asked them to conduct a multifaceted assessment," adding, "If the government intervenes in the evaluation, there would be no point in having expert reviewers."

The project application guidelines define an independent AI foundation model as a domestically developed model that is designed and pre-trained from scratch, rather than a derivative model developed through fine-tuning of foreign models, and as one that has no licensing issues with other companies' models.

Accordingly, there is a need to closely examine the license regulations of the foreign AI models utilized by companies. If foreign AI technology was partially adopted during the development process, the resulting model should at least be free from interference by the original foreign AI companies. If foreign AI providers were to sharply raise usage fees or restrict access altogether, the project's goal of establishing AI technology sovereignty would become unattainable.

Yuwon Kim, CEO of Naver Cloud

In this context, Upstage and SK Telecom reportedly used 'inference code' from Chinese models, while Naver Cloud used vision encoders and weights. Upstage and SK Telecom assert that inference code is free from licensing restrictions. In the case of Naver Cloud, there is a possibility that future changes in the licensing policy of the Chinese Qwen model could have an impact, but the company claims that switching to its own technology would resolve any issues.

As competition among participating companies intensifies, the situation is devolving into mudslinging. A representative from one consortium strongly criticized, "According to global standards for 'from scratch' development, the Naver Cloud consortium should be disqualified for misconduct," adding, "The Ministry of Science and ICT is just standing by, watching without making any official statement." Another representative expressed concern, saying, "This may only be the beginning of the controversy, and it is possible that none of the five consortia will remain free from scrutiny."

An AI company official, speaking on condition of anonymity, commented, "Currently, Korea's national AI is like repeatedly redecorating a Chinese building," and suggested, "In the end, for a truly independent AI, the government-though belatedly-should also consider designing a completely new architecture."