Operators of high-impact AI must be able to explain outputs and the main criteria behind them
Context fileUnder Framework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust, Article 34(1)
What does it require?
Operators of high-impact AI must put in place measures to explain the AI's final results, the main criteria used to reach them, and an overview of the training data, to the extent that this is technically feasible. The duty targets explainability of the system's decisions to users and affected people rather than full disclosure of the model.
Practical action
Document the decision criteria and training-data overview for each high-impact system and prepare a user-facing explanation format.
Who does it apply to?
AI business operators providing high-impact AI or products and services based on it.
Applies from:
Which controls meet this duty?
Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.
-
satisfiesProcessCustomer operations lead · once per ai systemDecision explanation, human review and appeal route
Serves 10 recorded duties · evidence: Adverse-decision explanation template, AI decision challenge and human review procedure, Challenge and reversal log
Explanation of results and criteria to affected people.
-
supportsProcessProduct or model owner · at launch and on material changeTechnical documentation, model cards and instructions for use
Serves 13 recorded duties · evidence: Technical documentation file, Model card or deployer information pack, Instructions for use
Training-data overview and decision logic documented.
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
| Evidence | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Explanation method and decision-criteria documentation | document |
Framework mappings
Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.
See every South Korea duty mapped this way →
| Framework | Reference | Note | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIST AI RMF 1.0 | MEASURE 2.9, GOVERN 5.1 | Explainability and communication to affected parties. | medium |
| ISO/IEC 42001:2023 | Annex A.8.2, A.7.3 | System documentation and data documentation. | low |
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Operators of high-impact AI must be able to explain outputs and the main criteria behind them (Framework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust)”. https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/south-korea-ai-basic-act-art-34-high-impact-ai-explanation-measures (accessed 24 September 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Cite the official text alongside it: Framework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust (AI Basic Act, Act No. 20676), Korea Ministry of Government Legislation, National Law Information Center, https://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=268543.
Similar obligations in other instruments
- Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union
- Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must tell natural persons that a high-risk AI system is used in decisions about them — EU AI Act, European Union
- Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers of emotion recognition or biometric categorisation must inform exposed persons — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must disclose deepfakes and AI-generated text published on matters of public interest — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request — EU AI Act, European Union
- Provide deployers with clear instructions for use — EU AI Act, European Union
Informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult qualified counsel before acting.