[Editorial Note] The Principle of 'Separation of Industrial and Financial Capital' at a Turning Point

Regulations in the Republic of Korea (ROK), once seen as unbreakable, are now being dismantled. The principle of 'Separation of industrial and financial capital', introduced in 1982 to prevent the negative effects of corporate monopolies, has reached a turning point after 43 years. The government has announced plans to create an unprecedentedly large policy fund to directly and indirectly support companies. Considering the traditionally conservative stance toward businesses in Korea, this is a remarkably swift change. The driving force behind the loosening of these heavy regulatory barriers has been the magic of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
There is a growing consensus that AI competitiveness is no longer just an issue for individual companies, but a matter of national competitiveness. This sentiment was reflected in recent remarks by President Lee Jae-myung. Meeting with leaders of Samsung Electronics and SK hynix, President Lee stated, "The restrictions on the separation of industrial and financial capital were intended to prevent monopolistic abuses, but in advanced industries that require large-scale investments, those monopoly concerns are already a thing of the past," suggesting the need to ease the system.
The government is considering opening up various types of public data necessary for AI training and has pledged to provide the vast amounts of electricity and water required to build AI infrastructure. The government's full-scale support has even drawn complaints from non-AI sectors.
It is a positive development that the government is taking the lead and showing flexibility, recognizing that national competitiveness depends on the growth of key industries. However, this awareness must be accompanied by one important premise: what the AI industry is bringing, or can bring, to the public.
Although the AI industry is deeply dependent on public resources, there remains skepticism about profitability, as seen in the cases of global AI companies. With tangible results still lacking, only certain sectors such as semiconductors and power companies, which are essential for infrastructure, appear to be within reach of the benefits.
Compared to traditional manufacturing, the advanced nature of these industries means their job creation effect is also limited. The social costs resulting from side effects such as misinformation, deepfakes, privacy breaches, and copyright disputes are also borne by the state. This has led to concerns that while the private sector reaps the profits, the government and society are left with the bill.
It is difficult to give a definitive answer regarding the so-called 'AI bubble.' Nevertheless, inaction is not an option. What matters most is ensuring that the fruits of this transformation do not end up as exclusive gains for a handful of companies.
Alongside discussions on deregulation, there must be a serious debate on how the achievements of the AI industry can be shared across society. Privileges must be accompanied by corresponding responsibilities. Even the magic word 'AI' cannot be an exception.
one1@fnnews.com Wonil Chung Reporter