Even with technology in hand, business cannot proceed without applicable regulations. Launching an unmanned delivery robot business required safety and certification standards. This explains why outdoor mobile robots were only permitted after years of struggle—numerous regulatory gaps identified during the regulatory sandbox demonstration process had to be addressed.
In practice, the concept of outdoor mobile robots was defined in the Intelligent Robot Act, and an operational safety certification system and mandatory insurance requirements were introduced. Regulations granting pedestrian status to certified robots were also established. Amending the Park Management Act was necessary for robots to enter parks for delivery and patrol purposes. The Personal Information Protection Act had to be revised to establish grounds for video recording and utilization by mobile devices. Launching new industries requires addressing many anticipated and unanticipated regulations like these. The government's swift and rational handling of such matters is key to supporting new industries.
Over the next decade, regulatory reform priorities should focus not on easing large-scale regulations but on fostering new industries. This approach is more strategic and practical. Reforming major regulations covering the Seoul metropolitan area, large corporations, labor, and safety requires public support. Resources and capacity for regulatory reform are limited. Rather than expending scarce resources on contentious large-scale regulations, it is better to invest them in securing victory for future industries such as artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology, and mobility.
New industries are characterized by uncertainty, gaps between technological and regulatory speeds, and cross-industry convergence. Without regulation, market uncertainty actually increases. Regulations can provide development and service standards while creating business opportunities through flexible application. This is why the government has been promoting a shift to negative regulation and has operated the regulatory sandbox for eight years. The key is properly operating existing systems.
First, the government must move away from ex-ante regulation. The 2011 revision of the Cosmetics Act was a decisive catalyst for K-beauty's growth. Changing from listing permitted ingredients to specifying only prohibited ones encouraged creative corporate attempts and opened the floodgates for innovation. However, notable examples since then are hard to find. The government should pursue negative regulation conversion far more vigorously, with the goal of creating second and third cosmetics law success stories.
Second, the regulatory sandbox should expand opportunities for new technologies to be validated in the market. From 2019 to 2024, 1,684 sandbox projects were approved, but only 22 percent led to actual businesses. This is due to approval delays, excessive conditions, and delays in post-demonstration legal amendments. The sandbox should not be a device for false hope but a springboard for corporate challenges.
Third, the government must actively mediate conflicts of interest between new and existing industries. If the government ignores conflicts, new industries cannot even attempt to launch. The government should build social consensus through safety nets including mediation, mutual benefit funds, and compensation systems.
The corporate role is equally important. Even with negative regulation, companies must demonstrate through data that risks can be managed. They should build trust through self-regulation, compliance with security standards, insurance coverage, and acceptance of strengthened ex-post regulations. Companies should also use the regulatory sandbox to demonstrate technological safety and effectiveness, and clearly present the benefits to be provided to the public. The justification for government decisions ultimately comes from public interest.
Traditional regulation often relied on preemptive control out of concern for violations. New industry regulation should shift toward prioritizing private sector attempts and strictly holding parties accountable when they betray trust. This regulatory paradigm shift must be achieved starting with new industries. The systems exist—negative regulation, sandboxes, and others. Let us operate them properly so that regulation becomes a stepping stone.
