The Complete Guide to Using AI as a Customer Service Professional in South Korea in 2025

Introduction: Using AI in Customer Service in South Korea in 2025 - South Korea's support ops are shifting from experiments to everyday tools: global research shows 71% of companies now use or pilot AI and customer service is a clear use case (about 24% adoption in Kore.ai's 2025 analysis), so Korean teams face a three-way challenge of speed, trust and compliance as they scale conversational assistants and agent-assist tools; local momentum is driven by mass smart‑device adoption and rising conversational AI demand, while new rules - notably Korea's AI Framework/Basic Act enacted in early 2025 - put transparency and human oversight front and center (see the AI law overview).

Upskilling is the practical move: Nucamp's AI Essentials for Work bootcamp teaches prompt craft, tool workflows and real‑world AI skills to help agents use AI safely and productively.

Expect hybrid workflows where chatbots handle 24/7 routine requests and trained humans resolve nuanced, high‑impact cases - faster, and with clearer disclosure and audit trails.

Bootcamp	Key details
AI Essentials for Work	15 weeks; courses: AI at Work: Foundations, Writing AI Prompts, Job-Based Practical AI Skills; early bird $3,582 / $3,942 after; syllabus AI Essentials for Work syllabus (Nucamp)

“We're entering a new era where AI is no longer a question of if, but how fast and how far.” ~ Raj Koneru, Founder and CEO, Kore.ai

South Korea's AI Basic Act, promulgated in January 2025 and taking effect on January 22, 2026, rewrites the rulebook for customer service teams: the law reaches domestic and foreign systems that affect Korean users and layers light‑touch rules for most tools with stricter duties for “high‑impact” and generative AI - think mandatory user notice, explicit labeling of AI‑generated text, images or voice that could be mistaken for reality, and pre‑deployment impact checks where decisions touch rights (hiring, credit, health).

Practically, that means support ops must inventory AI touchpoints, update agent scripts to disclose when AI is in the loop, document training data and explainability steps for higher‑risk flows, and be ready to show risk‑management plans and human‑oversight measures on request; foreign vendors meeting thresholds must appoint a local representative.

The Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) will investigate compliance and can order fixes, with administrative fines up to KRW 30 million for violations - a compliance bar that's notable but designed to balance safety and innovation.

For a clear legal summary see the Securiti AI Basic Act overview and a practitioner‑friendly explainer from the Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) on the AI Basic Act.

Item	Key fact
Enacted	January 21, 2025
Effective	January 22, 2026
Scope	Applies domestically and extraterritorially to acts affecting Korean users (security exemptions)
Core obligations	Transparency/labeling for AI & generative outputs; risk management, explainability, human oversight for high‑impact AI; impact assessments
Foreign operators	May need to designate a Korean representative if thresholds met
Enforcement	MSIT investigative powers; corrective orders
Penalties	Administrative fines up to KRW 30,000,000

South Korea's AI strategy is now a coordinated national push from a presidential-level committee down to procurement shifts that directly affect customer service teams: the Ministry of Science and ICT's roadmap outlines four flagship projects - a massive build‑out of AI computing infrastructure (targeting more than two exaflops, roughly 15× current capacity by 2030), big boosts to private investment, an “AI+X” drive to embed AI across eight industries, and a safety & security pillar that includes standards, social impact assessments and an AI Safety Institute (MSIT national AI strategy policy directions (Ministry of Science and ICT)); at the same time the newly formed National AI Strategy Committee is reshaping projects to invite stronger private leadership - for example restructuring the proposed AI computing center to raise private ownership and increase policy financing, a clear procurement signal that Korea wants industry partners to lead infrastructure delivery (BusinessKorea report on the National AI Strategy Committee and AI computing center).

For support ops this means preparing for faster access to national compute, clearer tech standards and explicit procurement timelines that will favor vendors aligned with Korea's safety, explainability and domestic‑chip priorities.

Flagship project / target	Key metric or goal
AI computing infrastructure	More than 2 exaflops by 2030 (≈15× current)
Private sector investment	KRW 65 trillion target (2024–2027); increased policy financing for AI data centers
AI+X adoption	70% industry, 95% public sector adoption target by 2030
Talent & standards	Develop 200,000 AI professionals by 2030; new safety, impact assessment and explainability frameworks

“If we boldly move forward and lead the future, AI will modernize the constitution of the entire industry and become the key to leading the Republic of Korea into a new era of prosperity.” - President Lee Jae Myung

Demand in 2025 is shifting away from entry‑level headcount toward hybrid CX and AI skills: a Chosun report notes that repetitive, entry‑level hires are being cut while openings for professionals with roughly 2–5 years' experience rose sharply (about +27% at major big tech firms and +14% at startups), and companies in tech hubs like Pangyo are increasingly hiring on demand rather than through large campus intakes - driving a premium for mid‑career customer service reps who combine empathy with AI fluency and for specialist roles such as “AI prompt planner” and “AI risk manager” that Google and others have started creating (see the Chosun analysis).

Employers are also investing in tools to speed hiring and matching: the South Korea AI recruitment market was roughly USD 21.61M in 2024 with multi‑year growth anticipated (MRFR projects a ~7.00% CAGR for 2025–2035), signaling stronger demand for recruiters and HR technologists who can run AI hiring systems.

Finally, CX research reminds teams that technology must amplify human connection - Acxiom's CX Trends shows 77% of consumers appreciate AI conveniences but still seek authentic human touch, meaning the highest‑demand roles will pair soft skills with prompt and oversight capabilities rather than pure automation talent.

Signal	Key fact
Chosun report: hiring mix shift in South Korea	Entry‑level hiring down (big tech new grad hiring −25%); mid‑career (2–5 yrs) openings +27% (big tech) / +14% (startups)
Market Research Future: South Korea AI recruitment market forecast	Market ~USD 21.61M (2024); CAGR ≈7.002% (2025–2035)
Acxiom CX Trends 2025: consumer preference for human-centric engagement	77% of consumers value AI conveniences but still seek real human interaction

Inventorying and classifying AI touchpoints is the practical first step for Korean support ops that want control, not chaos: IMARC's market research shows customer journey analytics in Korea was already a USD 285.87M market in 2024 and is forecast to grow rapidly, driven by omnichannel demand and real‑time personalization, so cataloging where AI appears - from web and mobile to social, email, call centers and branch/stores - is essential (see IMARC's touchpoint breakdown).

Map each touchpoint by function (self‑service chatbots, agent assist, search, QA, predictive recommendations) and risk (generative responses, automated decisions affecting rights) so teams can prioritize labeling and oversight under the AI Basic Act; vendor platforms like Kore.ai illustrate common capabilities - 24/7 virtual agents, real‑time agent guidance and automated QA - that will likely show up across those channels.

Don't forget the human dimension: Retail TouchPoints finds Koreans still value in‑store experiences even as 82% trust AI product recommendations, so classify hybrid touchpoints (phygital kiosks, app→in‑store handoffs) that must preserve brand voice and consent.

The simple rule: log every AI interaction, tag its purpose, risk tier, and owner - so a customer's switch from app chat to a human at a counter feels seamless, auditable and respectful of privacy.

Touchpoint	Primary AI functions / examples
Web	AI agents, conversational search, real‑time personalization (IMARC; Kore.ai)
Mobile	App assistants, contextual recommendations, auto‑refill triggers (IMARC; Retail TouchPoints)
Social	Bot engagement, sentiment monitoring, campaign orchestration (IMARC)
Email	Automated replies, ticket triage, journey orchestration (IMARC)
Branch / Store	Phygital assistants, AI‑driven product suggestions, in‑store handoffs (IMARC; Retail TouchPoints)
Call Center	Agent assist, smart routing, QA and summary automation (IMARC; Kore.ai)

“If the customer realises how much you know about them, they'll feel trapped. So it has to be disguised. If it feels too accurate, it feels manipulative.”

Clear labeling and tight, practice-ready agent scripts are the compliance glue for Korean support teams as the AI Basic/Framework Act moves from law to everyday operations: Article 31 requires providers to notify users in advance and to label generative outputs (and to make outputs that could be mistaken for reality plainly identifiable), while Article 34 and related guidance expect explainability, human oversight and risk controls for higher‑impact flows - so a simple operational rule works best: tell customers up front, mark AI content visibly, and give an easy path to human review for consequential decisions.

Practical examples that align with official guidance include a brief pre‑chat notice (“This session uses AI assistance - you will be informed when a reply is AI‑generated”), inline labels on replies that are synthetic, and escalation scripts that offer explanation and human review when outcomes affect rights (hiring, credit, medical guidance).

For plain-English summaries see the Future of Privacy Forum AI Framework Act overview and Securiti practitioner guide to the Basic AI Act, and consult the Korean Communications Commission generative AI user protection guidance for service‑level specifics when crafting UI banners and agent prompts.

Disclosure type	Sample script / UI example
Advance notice (Article 31)	“This service uses AI assistance. Continue?”
AI‑generated reply label	“Response generated by AI” badge on message
Deepfake‑style media	“This audio/video was created by an AI system”
High‑impact decision / automated outcome	“This result was influenced by AI. Request human review or explanation”

“it is part of our endeavors to meet halfway between protecting personal data and encouraging AI-driven innovation. This will be a great guidance material for the development and usage of trustworthy AI.” - Professor Byoung Pil Kim

South Korea's updated PIPA framework makes human oversight a concrete, frontline requirement rather than a checkbox: when a decision is made by a

“fully automated”

system that affects a person's rights or obligations, customers can request a concise, meaningful explanation and even refuse the automated outcome - forcing the data controller to either stop applying the decision or reprocess it with human intervention unless there was prior clear notice and consent (see the Ius Laboris PIPA practical summary and the Lee & Ko PIPA analysis).

That legal backbone means agent scripts must do three things fast and simply: (1) surface whether an outcome was automated and how it materially used personal data, (2) offer an easy path to request explanation or human review, and (3) record and escalate the request so the organisation meets the statutory timetable (generally 30 days to take measures, extendable by up to 60 days).

Operationally, this looks like tagging automated flows in the CRM, training agents to treat

“explain/review”

requests as high‑priority cases, and ensuring privacy officers have access to decision criteria to deliver non‑technical explanations - because regulators expect procedures no more burdensome than ordinary access requests.

For multinational vendors this also matters: PIPA's scope reaches acts affecting Korean users, so disclosures and objection routes must be localized and easy to use.

In short, frontline guidance must turn abstract rights into clear customer-facing options and auditable internal steps so a Korean consumer's challenge to an AI decision isn't a

“paper chase”

but a prompt, human‑led remedy (read more on the Pandectes PIPA overview for Korea and the Lee & Ko amended Enforcement Decree analysis).

Data subject right / controller duty	Key detail
Right to explanation	Concise, meaningful explanation of decision criteria and outcome on request (Ius Laboris)
Right to refuse automated decision	Can refuse if rights/obligations are significantly affected; controller must refrain or reprocess with human intervention unless prior clear notice/consent (Lee & Ko)
Disclosure obligation	Must publish that automated decision-making is used, its purpose, data types and procedures for exercising rights (Lee & Ko)
Timeline for measures	Generally 30 days to act after request; may extend up to 60 days for legitimate reasons (Lee & Ko)

Privacy and IP risk controls must be front-and-center in every vendor contract for South Korea: the Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC) now expects clear rules on cross‑border transfers, security, subcontracting and deletion, and the regulator has already ordered firms to halt unlawful exports and delete exported data - a stark reminder that contract language has real teeth.

Start with explicit cross‑border transfer clauses that require data subject notice/consent or documented legal exception, and obligate vendors to maintain approved protections (for example certification or ISMS‑P safeguards) and to cooperate with local remediation; the PIPC's guidance for foreign companies is a helpful baseline (PIPC guidelines for foreign companies (Korean Data Protection Authority)).

Include a 72‑hour breach notification timeline with regulator‑reporting thresholds, encryption and access‑control security standards, audit and subcontractor‑management rights (the PIPC's integrated guide consolidates these duties and inspection expectations), and explicit clauses on model training data, deletion and IP use to avoid downstream liability (PIPC integrated guide on personal data processing (July 11, 2025)).

Finally, require a named Chief Privacy Officer contact and remedies for non‑compliance: administrative corrective orders, fines and even criminal exposure are real risks in Korea, so mirror statutory duties in contracts and build enforceable SLA‑level obligations (DLA Piper Korea data protection overview).

Contract clause	What to require
Cross‑border transfer	Consent/exception basis, destination details, protective measures (e.g., ISMS‑P) and right to suspend/delete exports
Breach notification	Notify affected users and regulator within 72 hours; escalation matrix and remediation plan
Security & data handling	Encryption, access controls, logging, pseudonymization and certified technical safeguards
Subcontractors & audits	Prior notice/approval, flow‑down obligations, audit rights and certification‑based inspections
CPO & local contact	Named privacy officer, local representative for foreign vendors and cooperation obligations
IP & model use	Permitted training/data use, deletion rights, and indemnities for unlawful processing or transfer
Enforcement remedies	Termination rights, liquidated damages and cooperation with corrective orders and investigations

Choosing the “best” AI chatbot for South Korea in 2025 comes down to three practical filters: Korean‑language fidelity, enterprise governance (on‑prem or local rep for compliance), and multilingual scale for overseas customers.

For large regulated organisations that need deep integrations, observability and governance-ready features, Kore.ai's enterprise agent platform is a strong fit - its marketplace, RAG support and audit tooling are built for contact centers that must show explainability and human‑in‑the‑loop controls (Kore.ai enterprise agent platform).

For teams that prioritise Korean‑first language nuance or private deployments, homegrown entrants like LG's ChatExaone (Exaone LLM and on‑prem options) signal a credible local alternative that can better handle honorifics and data‑sovereignty needs (LG ChatExaone enterprise AI).

If global coverage and turnkey multilingual routing matter, the 2025 roundups show platforms such as Crescendo/Zendesk/Freshchat excel at wide language support and 24/7 voice+chat orchestration - use these when serving mixed-language customer bases (Crescendo.ai multilingual chatbot roundup).

In practice, pilot with a small Korean corpus and an escalation path to human agents: the best choice is the one that preserves brand voice in Korean, passes your impact‑assessment, and shaves minutes off agents' daily workload without sounding “too perfect” to customers.

“What I was really trying to solve was how to give 15–20 minutes back each day to our financial advisors.” - Morgan Stanley

South Korea's new AI Basic Act shifts from policy to a hard deadline - organizations have a one‑year runway to full enforcement on January 22, 2026, so think of this as a regulatory sprint: inventory every AI touchpoint, classify high‑impact and generative systems, run impact assessments, and build or document risk‑management and human‑oversight controls now rather than later (see the detailed timeline and obligations in the Araki Law summary).

Expect label and notice rules for generative outputs, extraterritorial reach that can require foreign vendors to appoint a domestic representative, and enforcement powers for MSIT with administrative fines up to KRW 30 million - practical readiness means governance, vendor clauses, and auditable records.

Operationalize compliance by tying technical controls to simple customer scripts (advance notice,

AI‑generated

labels, easy human review) and monitor MSIT's forthcoming enforcement decrees for computational thresholds and representative criteria; Securiti's practitioner overview is a useful operational checklist for mapping obligations to tools and datasets.

Last: invest in people - a short, pragmatic upskilling plan such as Nucamp AI Essentials for Work bootcamp registration (prompt craft, tool workflows and real‑world AI skills) helps frontline agents turn compliance into better CX instead of red tape.

Item	Key fact / next step
Enforcement date	January 22, 2026 - one year transition (Araki Law)
Core legal duties	Transparency/labeling, impact assessments, risk management, local representative for some foreign operators, fines up to KRW 30M (Securiti)
Immediate operational steps	AI inventory & classification; vendor contract clauses; customer disclosure scripts; frontline training (Nucamp AI Essentials for Work bootcamp registration)