Korea's AI Framework Act — risk classification and obligations for AI providers, with phased entry into force.
AI providers offering services in Korea.
Continuous evidence pipeline available; audit support included for all customers.
These are the obligations a regulated entity owes — the things an assessor or supervisor will ask about.
Risk-based classification with high-impact AI obligations.
Transparency for AI interactions and synthetic content.
Cooperation with Korea AI Safety Institute on evaluation.
Each requirement above is bound to live telemetry — not screenshots. The mapping below is what your auditor or regulator sees.
Model registry with Korea AI Act tier classification.
Synthetic content labelling and transparency disclosures.
Each evidence artifact is signed and timestamped. Auditors can verify integrity without trusting Safeguard.
AI Act tiering record.
Transparency notice library.
These frameworks share substantial control overlap with Korea AI Act. Customers running one assessment typically satisfy the others with the same evidence base.
European Union
The world's first comprehensive AI regulation — risk-based, with phased prohibitions, transparency duties, and obligations for high-risk and general-purpose AI.
APAC
Singapore's AI governance testing framework — voluntary toolkit and attestation for trustworthy AI.
APAC
China's Interim Measures for the Management of Generative AI Services — model registration, content labelling, training data review.
Bring the framework. We'll walk the controls with you — section by section, evidence packet by evidence packet, with the regulators you actually have to answer to.