South Korea’s Privacy Regulator Steps In to Bring Order to the Generative AI Wild West

Key Takeaways

• First-Ever PIPC Guidelines: South Korea’s privacy regulator has released its inaugural Guidelines on Personal Data Processing for Generative AI to clarify how the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) applies across the AI lifecycle.
• Four-Stage Privacy Framework: The guidance sets out safeguards for purpose setting, strategy development, AI training, and ongoing application and management, with privacy protections embedded at each step.
• Model-Type Specific Rules: AI models are classified into LLM-as-a-Service, off-the-shelf models, and self-developed systems, each with linked lawful processing bases and tailored safeguards.
• CPO-Led Governance: The guidelines place Chief Privacy Officers at the center of AI privacy governance, responsible for oversight, privacy-by-design integration, and ongoing risk management.
• Grounded in Real Cases: Recommendations draw from PIPC’s enforcement actions, adequacy reviews, and regulatory sandbox experience, making them practical rather than purely theoretical.

Deep Dive

Generative AI may be the tech world’s shiny new engine, but as it powers everything from government chatbots to healthcare diagnostics, it has become appararent that these models eat data for breakfast, and a lot of that data is personal. On August 6, 2025, South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC) decided it was time to lay down the law, or at least a roadmap, by releasing its first Guidelines on Personal Data Processing for Generative AI.

Unveiled at the PIPC’s Open Seminar on Generative AI and Privacy, the guidelines aim to do something deceptively simple yet desperately needed: explain how the country’s Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) applies at every stage of AI’s life, from its earliest training runs to the moment it’s out in the world making decisions and answering prompts.

The move comes after months of conversations with AI startups, enterprise developers, and service providers who all told the regulator the same thing — they’re excited about what AI can do, but they’re flying blind when it comes to privacy rules. As one common refrain put it: the legal map has too many blank spots.

PIPC’s answer is a four-stage framework, with privacy baked in from the start:

• Purpose Setting: Be clear about why you’re building or using a model and map out the lawful grounds for processing personal data, based on what kind of data it is and where it came from.
• Establishing Strategies: Take a hard look at the privacy risks before you code, with measures tailored to your development approach and supported by Privacy Impact Assessments.
• AI Training & Development: Guard against everything from data poisoning to jailbreaks, and factor in newer risks like agentic AI going off-script.
• Application & Management: Keep the guardrails up once the model is live, including clear acceptable use policies and processes to protect people’s rights.

Recognizing that not all AI models are created, or deployed, the same way, the guidelines break them into three categories, including LLM-as-a-Service (think ChatGPT integrations), off-the-shelf models, and fully self-developed systems. For each, PIPC pairs lawful data processing bases with practical safeguards.

Privacy Leadership Front and Center

A major theme running through the document is governance, specifically the role of a Chief Privacy Officer as the anchor for internal oversight. The CPO’s job? Make sure privacy by design isn’t just a buzzword but a habit, with policies, monitoring, and risk assessments becoming part of the AI team’s regular rhythm.

PIPC didn’t pull these recommendations out of thin air. The guidelines build on its past enforcement cases, adequacy reviews, and even its regulatory sandbox program, making them more grounded than theoretical. They also address cutting-edge concepts like knowledge distillation and machine unlearning, and will be updated regularly as both technology and privacy law evolve.

For Chairperson Haksoo Ko, the goal is balance.

“This guidance material aims to provide clarity to iron out legal uncertainties that AI practitioners have encountered and systematically incorporate privacy-safeguarding perspectives throughout the lifecycle of generative AI,” he said, adding that the aim is to let privacy and innovation “coexist in a win-win manner.”

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.