AJU PRESS ASIA FIRST NEWS AGENCY

Journalist

&
""
Latest by
  • China Develops AI Model for Targeting F-35 Stealth Fighters with 96.4% Accuracy
    China Develops AI Model for Targeting F-35 Stealth Fighters with 96.4% Accuracy China has developed AI technology capable of intercepting advanced stealth fighters such as the F-22 and F-35.Beijing Institute of Technology, in collaboration with the China Academy of Air-to-Air Missile Research, recently created a lightweight AI model applicable to missile-mounted infrared imaging systems, according to the South China Morning Post on August 14. The research findings were published in the Chinese journal 'Journal of Electronic Measurement and Instrumentation.'Infrared-guided missiles track targets by detecting heat emitted from aircraft engines and surfaces. Stealth fighters also emit heat, making them targets for infrared missiles. To counter this, aircraft release high-temperature flares to disrupt missile tracking. The research team developed an AI model that distinguishes between the infrared characteristics of heat signals from aircraft and flares.The team tested the AI model using 3,245 infrared images collected from three types of aerial targets, including aircraft mimicking the F-22 and F-35, as well as loitering munitions. Simulation results showed that the AI model achieved a target identification accuracy of 97.1%. In actual hardware tests, the accuracy was recorded at 96.4%. The average inference time was just 1.5 milliseconds, with total power consumption at approximately 2.2 watts.Notably, the researchers significantly reduced the size and computational requirements of the AI model for missile integration. They lowered the number of parameters by 16.1% compared to existing methods and reduced the required computational load by 19.2%. This allowed for high accuracy and fast processing speeds while adhering to strict size, weight, and power consumption constraints for missiles. The researchers stated, 'The lightweight AI model can provide rapid identification while maintaining high identification capability, making it widely applicable for future air-to-air missiles.'However, the team noted that specific data used for identifying fifth-generation fighters cannot be disclosed due to confidentiality issues. They plan to continue research to further enhance identification accuracy and processing speed.* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:28:00
  • SK hynix surges as KOSPI extends fifth-day rally
    SK hynix surges as KOSPI extends fifth-day rally SEOUL, August 14 (AJP) - Seoul's memory trade ran into a fifth straight session Friday, with SK hynix jumping more than 5 percent after a U.S. flash memory maker's long-term margin targets pushed investors to reprice the storage cycle. The KOSPI traded at 6,944.14, up 1.9 percent, after pushing back above the 7,000 line early in the session and then slipping under it. The index added 130.80 points. Foreigners bought a net 572.8 billion won ($404.3 million) of Seoul shares, while individuals sold a net 321.0 billion won ($226.6 million) and institutions a net 233.4 billion won ($164.7 million). SK hynix traded at 1,682,000 won ($1,187), up 5.6 percent. Samsung Electronics rose 0.9 percent to 270,500 won ($191), a fraction of the move in its smaller rival, leaving the gap between the two memory makers as wide as it has been during this rally. The trigger was SanDisk's investor day in the United States, where the company set a target of roughly 80 percent non-GAAP gross margins from fiscal 2028 through fiscal 2030 and disclosed supply agreements with eight customers covering about two-thirds of bit shipments by fiscal 2028. SanDisk shares closed up about 13.7 percent Thursday, and SK hynix's U.S.-listed shares rose about 7 percent alongside them. Traders in Seoul read the NAND flash targets as a signal that pricing power in memory is holding rather than peaking, which lands more directly on SK hynix than on the more diversified Samsung Electronics. Softer U.S. inflation data gave the rally a second leg. Consumer prices rose 0.1 percent in July and producer prices were flat, readings that trimmed market odds of a Federal Reserve rate increase at the September meeting and sent the S&P 500 to a record. The bid broadened past chips. Hyundai Motor climbed 6.8 percent to 447,000 won ($315) and Kia rose 3.1 percent to 141,700 won ($100), while SK square gained 3.2 percent to 1,153,000 won ($814). Not everything joined. Hanwha Aerospace fell 4.2 percent to 1,135,000 won ($801), the sharpest decline among the largest listings. The KOSDAQ, the secondary market for smaller and technology companies, edged up 0.2 percent to 863.03, well behind the main index in Seoul. In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 traded at 69,374.53, up 1.6 percent. The won traded at 1,416.80 per dollar, marginally stronger than Thursday. 2026-08-14 10:24:05
  • Is the National Museum of Korea Just an Administrative Agency?
    Is the National Museum of Korea Just an Administrative Agency? ◆ Absence of Cultural Policy When citizens think about the purpose of national cultural institutions, their responses typically revolve around preserving cultural heritage for future generations, ensuring cultural enjoyment for all citizens, or showcasing the nation's dignity. Many believe that national cultural institutions exist solely as sanctuaries of pure beauty, but this is not the case. With the establishment of nation-states in the late 18th and 19th centuries, national cultural institutions were designed as politically motivated entities to provide legitimacy to the state rather than merely to enjoy beauty. In the past, legitimacy was secured through divine power or military force, but in a nation-state devoid of these, it became imperative to create a shared history and aesthetic consciousness among the imagined community of citizens through cultural institutions like museums and theaters. Thus, these institutions were necessary for producing 'cultural hegemony' by narrativizing exhibitions and performances, as Antonio Gramsci described. Conversely, these cultural institutions also possess a different face. While markets leave only what sells and politics erases minorities through majority rule, well-functioning cultural institutions expand the diversity of voices and thoughts by accommodating narratives that have been erased or ignored in social memory. This duality—where a tool that enforces common sense becomes a rebel that fractures it—characterizes cultural institutions, which embrace conflict and difference. Therefore, national cultural institutions are born with the contradiction of being both a means of integration and a tool of resistance, and this contradiction is not a flaw to be resolved but a condition of their very existence. The challenge lies in how to manage this contradiction, and the answer is determined by governance structures. Institutional choices, such as job security for professionals and multi-year budgeting, cannot be replaced by mere words. When professional organizations are overwhelmed by administration, and the heads of theaters change with each regime, it demonstrates an attitude of using cultural institutions solely as tools for producing hegemony. In contrast, a structure that robustly guarantees the autonomy of professionals expresses a nation's historical and cultural identity by keeping cultural institutions open as spaces for debate and reflection. ◆ Different Governance Structures for the Same Institution In South Korea, the governance structures of national cultural institutions, which serve as spaces for creating the nation's cultural appeal and act as guardians of the times, vary significantly. While the National Museum of Korea, the National Gugak Center, and the National Library operate as general administrative agencies under the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art and the National Theater are designated as responsible management agencies, and the National World Writing Museum operates as a separate legal entity. Institutions established before the 2000s began as general administrative agencies. However, following the 1997 financial crisis, the introduction of the responsible management agency system aimed at enhancing administrative efficiency and service quality led to the National Theater's establishment in 2000 and the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art's incorporation in 2006, although they were changed to responsible management agencies. Discussions began in 2010 regarding the establishment and operation of a National Museum of Korea, but after nearly eight years of deliberation, it was abandoned by 2018. The first national cultural institution to launch as a corporation was the 'Seoul Arts Center' in 1987. However, while the Ministry of Culture wasted time on discussions about incorporation, institutions like the Independence Hall (established in 1986) and the National Maritime Museum (converted to a special corporation in 2015) established advanced corporate governance structures ahead of the Ministry of Culture. At that time, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology amended the law on the establishment and operation of science museums, leading to the incorporation of the National Science Museum in 2013, followed by the National Gwangju Science Museum and the National Busan Science Museum in 2015, and the National Aviation Museum in 2020. As a result, national cultural facilities under different ministries were established as special corporations with distinct governance structures, despite all being labeled 'national.' The reason for this is clear. In the absence of a foundational philosophy for national cultural policy, there is no overarching body or unified law to oversee museum policy, leading each ministry to create museums as needed through individual legislation, resulting in varied organizational forms based on the timing of establishment and the policy judgments of the respective ministries. In fact, the cultural policy adopted and implemented by a nation reflects how its government exercises power, views the market, and interacts with its citizens, serving as a definitive measure of the nation's character. The fact that the governance structures of national cultural institutions vary indicates a serious issue of 'lack of social consensus on a coherent national philosophy and identity.' Many countries adopt different cultural policy principles based on their cultural policy goals. Notable cultural economists Harry Hillman Chartrand and Claire McCoy categorize these principles into four main types: the 'facilitator model,' where the government indirectly encourages private support for the arts through tax incentives, as seen in the U.S.; the 'patron model,' where the government provides funding but delegates specific support decisions to independent committees, as in the U.K.; the 'designer model,' where cultural support is integrated into the government's macro welfare and social policies, providing job security and welfare for artists, as in France; and the 'engineer model,' used by former communist countries, where the government controls the ownership of art and uses it as a tool for political purposes. ◆ Wandering Korean Cultural Policy Since the establishment of the Republic of Korea in 1948, the foundation of Korean cultural policy has alternated among the four models of engineer, patron, designer, and facilitator with each change of government. This reflects not just differences in policy direction but a fundamental lack of philosophy regarding how the state views culture and the arts. The Korea Arts and Culture Promotion Agency, established in 1973, is a prime example of a government-led engineer model, where the government directly plans and executes cultural policies and controls budgets, embodying a supply-driven model typical of developing countries. This model is an extension of the 'developmental state' model that dominated Korean administration at the time. Subsequently, the establishment of the Korea Arts Council (ARKO) adopted a committee-based approach, officially espousing the patron model of 'supporting without interference.' However, the powerful central authority of the Ministry of Culture, which holds budgetary and personnel authority, has led to a hybrid form that combines French bureaucratic elements with British-style professional committees, where independence is often more of a slogan than a reality. At the same time, the government has a strong tendency to set macro goals such as national development strategies, job creation, and regional balanced development, incorporating the cultural sector into these frameworks. As a result, culture and the arts are often treated as tools to achieve policy objectives rather than being respected for their intrinsic value. More concerning is the fact that the engineer model from the military regime era has not been completely eradicated. Attempts to control culture and the arts based on the ideological leanings of the regime, as seen in the blacklist and whitelist incidents, have persisted into recent years, indicating that Korean cultural policy has not fully escaped the remnants of authoritarianism. The facilitator model, which is partially adopted, mimics tax incentives and encourages patronage activities, but the institutional and cultural soil necessary for the arts ecosystem to be self-sustaining is still not mature. Consequently, the reliance on government funding remains high. This mixture of models fundamentally undermines the sustainability of policies. With each change of government every five years, the direction of cultural policy swings from patron to designer, then back to engineer, leading the cultural sector to become accustomed to seeking government guidelines and connections while claiming creative autonomy. Although a fair public competition process is maintained, only proposals that align with government-defined key tasks tend to survive. Of course, there are counterarguments that this mixture should not be viewed negatively. While the West has settled into specific models over centuries through civil society and cultural markets, Korea has experienced rapid growth through both government-led top-down support and the swift rise of the private sector, suggesting that rather than completely discarding this hybrid model, it may be more realistic to adopt a specific British or French model as a principle while refining it with the advantages of the American model. Nevertheless, the diagnosis that current Korean cultural policy remains in a transitional phase, lacking a central principle, is undeniable. To advance toward becoming a true cultural advanced nation, it is imperative to establish a legal and institutional framework that firmly upholds the principle of 'supporting without interference' in cultural and artistic policy, regardless of the regime's inclinations. ◆ Museum Policy Without a Control Tower The reason each national cultural institution has a different governance structure is that the logic of the times at which they were established has fossilized. The National Museum of Korea was established after liberation, while the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, the National Theater, and the National Gugak Center were mostly born as direct organizations under the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Culture during the state-led modernization period of the 1960s to 1980s. During this time, the state understood culture not as autonomy but as part of governance, and thus these institutions inherited the bureaucratic structures of civil service, including job classifications and ranks. In contrast, institutions like the Sejong Institute Foundation, the Korean Literature Translation Institute, and the Korea Creative Content Agency were established in the 2000s with the emergence of terms like 'cultural industry' and 'Korean Wave,' adopting relatively flexible quasi-governmental forms to align with their new missions of industry promotion. According to Yang Hyun-mi's 2023 study on museum policy governance, South Korea operates six museum-related laws across five ministries, with 23 ministries establishing and operating a total of 98 national museums based on their own logic, highlighting the absence of an integrated policy governance structure. The more fundamental reason for this situation is the lack of a higher body to oversee a 'national cultural philosophy.' The French Ministry of Culture has designed the status of all cultural institutions under a clear national philosophy of 'culture is not merely a commodity,' which has been in place since André Malraux, advocating for the legal protection and support of cultural goods and services. In the U.S., the National Endowment for the Arts oversees museums, libraries, and archives through the Institute of Museum and Library Services, while the U.K. manages museums and libraries through independent public bodies based on the principle of 'arms-length.' France's Ministry of Culture oversees museums through the Directorate General of Heritage and Architecture, while the Directorate General of Media and Cultural Industries manages library policies. In contrast, South Korea has individual establishment laws for each institution, such as the 'Museum and Art Museum Promotion Act' (1990) and the 'Science Museum Act' (1992), but lacks a unified philosophical framework governing all national cultural institutions. There is only a requirement for prior feasibility assessments by the Ministry of Culture when establishing museums. As a result, each institution has been assigned a governance structure based solely on its political situation and the negotiating power of its respective ministry, leading to the patchwork system seen today. The government has created new institutions through separate laws and organizational principles without ever considering the museum's academic significance or integrating them into a cohesive system. Consequently, despite being under the umbrella of 'cultural administration,' the personnel regulations, budgeting methods, and degrees of political independence vary significantly among institutions, and over time, this has become a hegemonic characteristic of each institution. This proves that national cultural institutions have never been designed under a macro 'cultural philosophy' or a comprehensive 'master plan.' Therefore, it is necessary to legislate that the Ministry of Culture oversees the establishment and operation of national cultural institutions, allowing it to determine governance structures from a broader cultural policy perspective. Additionally, leveraging the symbolic significance of the Sejong National Museum Complex as the first museum cluster in the country, efforts should be made to unify the project, which is currently dispersed among six agencies, including the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and the Ministry of Interior and Safety, to ensure a cohesive museum policy. The current situation, where multiple agencies create facilities based on their own criteria, will inevitably lead to issues such as inconsistencies in collection management systems, lack of a unified brand, and fragmented financial planning. Therefore, structural flaws at the construction stage cannot be resolved merely through post-opening operational integration. The common lesson from the Smithsonian Institution in the U.S., the French Ministry of Culture, and the U.K.'s DCMS is that a single governing body overseeing museum policy from the outset, while ensuring the professional autonomy of individual institutions, is effective. This overarching responsibility must be clear from the initial construction phase and cannot be postponed until after opening. Thus, the Ministry of Culture, as the legal governing body for museum policy, should take on the overall responsibility of establishing and approving master plans and exhibition standards from the construction phase, while the Happy City Corporation should carry out infrastructure development according to those guidelines. The unification of operational entities post-opening will also be effective only if this overarching responsibility is established from the construction phase. The difficulties of inter-agency organizational and budget coordination and the utilization of individual ministries' expertise should continue to be examined, but this should not be a reason to defer the Ministry of Culture's overarching responsibility. ◆ Culture and Arts Sacrificed to Bureaucratic Greed The absence of a control tower in museum policy is a result of the Ministry of Culture's bureaucratic organization, as well as the instinct of each ministry to protect its vested interests and engage in departmental self-interest, which obstructs the advanced transition of governance structures in cultural institutions. In particular, the Ministry of Culture and the Cultural Heritage Administration's love for general administrative agencies is boundless. They argue that preservation's public nature and strong enforcement are core justifications for direct state management. They assert that the irreplaceable preservation of cultural heritage necessitates long-term state involvement rather than relying on profit-driven private governance. Moreover, they contend that strong regulations, such as restrictions on private property rights and the need for state legitimacy in exercising diplomatic representation, require general administrative agencies. The argument that stable budget acquisition and unlimited responsibility for policy failures can only be achieved through general administrative agencies also hinders governance changes. Above all, the belief that evaluating culture based on efficiency undermines the state's responsibilities is firmly entrenched. This stands in stark contrast to countries like France, the U.S., the U.K., and Germany, which have proven to be more effective in preserving and developing cultural heritage. Cultural institutions such as libraries, museums, and the National Gugak Center are functional entities that provide cultural services to the public and conduct research and exhibitions. However, confining them within the framework of general administrative agencies is a clear example of bureaucratic self-interest that misapplies regulatory logic. It is nonsensical for the state to directly manage operational entities where the enforcement of public power is unnecessary. Instead, bureaucratic control and rotation stifle organizational expertise and lead to the subjugation of academic and artistic freedom to the whims of the regime. An administrative model bound by civil service personnel and budget regulations cannot respond flexibly to digital transformation and changing demands. The notion that the state and bureaucrats must lead and guide the people in an advanced Korea is outdated. A swift transition to advanced governance structures, such as independent incorporation, is essential to maximize autonomy and expertise. Bureaucratic organizations instinctively resist relinquishing control over their personnel and related rotational positions. The intensity of this resistance varies depending on the nature of the institution. The larger and more symbolic the institution, the stronger the ministry's desire to maintain control, while relatively new or industry-promoting institutions can be placed at a distance without significant loss to the ministry or bureaucrats. Ultimately, the differences in governance structures today are not the result of philosophical judgments but rather the remnants of a long-standing power struggle between ministries and institutions. Particularly in overlapping areas of jurisdiction between ministries, temporary fixes have been hastily applied. A typical example is the division of budget and operations for overseas Korean cultural centers, which fall under the Ministry of Culture for budget and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for oversight. This reflects a compromise between the interests of the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs rather than a system designed from a single philosophical standpoint. The recent absorption of the Overseas Cultural Promotion Agency into the Ministry of Culture's International Cultural Promotion Policy Office, followed by its reallocation under the Deputy Minister, and the shifting of the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art from the Cultural Infrastructure Division to the Visual Design Division, are all indicative of this fluidity. Such repeated adjustments occur not because a fundamental philosophical organization has been established, but rather because no such organization has ever existed, leading to a patchwork of administrative convenience. Additionally, the pyramid-like promotion structure of central government exacerbates the problem. Positions such as the directors of the National Museum, the National Library, the National Gugak Center, and the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art have functioned as honorable destinations for retiring bureaucrats and as administrative territories for advancing within the senior civil service. While it is true that administrative heads of general administrative agencies benefit from budget acquisition and organizational management, this has further slowed the change in governance structures. In any case, the moment national cultural institutions are incorporated, the positions of administrative bureaucrats will disappear entirely, leading to anticipated resistance and opposition from the organization. The obsession with control over personnel and budgets also plays a role. To move toward advanced governance based on the principle of arms-length, budget and personnel authority must be fully transferred to the cultural institutions, but the power of bureaucratic organizations stems from that very 'control.' Therefore, expecting bureaucratic organizations to voluntarily relinquish power may have been unrealistic from the start. The fragmented reality of museum and art policies across the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport is not merely a product of profound national philosophy but rather a reflection of each ministry's desire to secure positions for retiring bureaucrats. However, it is also important to recognize that the practical dilemmas faced by the Korean institutional environment cannot be easily dismissed. Notably, the most vehement opposition to incorporation comes not only from bureaucrats but also from curators and staff within the institutions. Incorporation signifies the loss of civil servant status, job insecurity, and pressure for profitability through increased admission fees or sponsorship acquisition. The past attempt to incorporate the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art was thwarted by internal staff fighting for their survival, demonstrating that these concerns are not unfounded. Skepticism about the self-correcting ability of private board systems is not entirely unfounded. Concerns that conflicts over political appointments may intensify with each regime change have already been confirmed through incidents like the blacklist and whitelist controversies at the Korea Arts Council. Ironically, this has provided bureaucrats with a defense justification that 'it is better for civil servants to manage, as it is relatively neutral and stable.' Finally, it cannot be overlooked that the preconditions for the American-style private autonomy model, such as patronage and corporate or individual donations, have not yet matured in Korea. If the government reduces financial support under the pretext of incorporation, the very survival of the institutions could be jeopardized, which is a legitimate concern stemming from structural limitations. Ultimately, the stagnation of governance in Korean cultural administration cannot be explained solely by the self-preservation of bureaucrats. The interplay of active factors, such as bureaucratic power obsession, demands for job security from the field, trial and error in implementing private autonomous governance, and a weak donation ecosystem, collectively delays reform. Therefore, achieving genuine transformation requires a balanced approach that includes criticism aimed at bureaucratic vested interests, institutional buffers that can guarantee job security and autonomy, and parallel strategies to cultivate the private donation ecosystem. In any case, the underlying conclusion regarding the varying governance structures of national cultural institutions in Korea is that their differences stem not from a lack of philosophy but from the accumulation of historical needs, inter-ministerial power struggles, and bureaucratic self-preservation logic that have left little room for philosophical intervention. ◆ The Governance Structure of Cultural Institutions Reflects Cultural Policy The governance structures of museums and galleries can be categorized based on who delegates ownership, financial, and decision-making authority to what type of organization. Examining cases from Europe, the U.S., and Japan reveals a trend away from direct state management toward securing both independence and accountability. The most representative and advanced governance structure, characterized by strong autonomy for cultural institutions, is the U.K.'s 'Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB)' model. Most cultural institutions in the U.K., regardless of size, adopt this governance structure, which receives partial financial support from the state. For example, the British Museum has a board of up to 25 members, with one appointed by the monarch, 15 by the Prime Minister, and five by the board itself. The British Museum operates as a non-departmental public body, receiving support from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport while being accountable to Parliament. The Imperial War Museum (IWM), another national museum in the U.K., is governed by a board under laws such as the Imperial War Museum Act of 1920 and 1955, as well as the Museums and Galleries Act of 1992, operating as a non-departmental public body with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport as its sponsoring body. The core of this system is a compromise where the government provides funding but delegates collection management and daily operations to the board, reducing political interference while ensuring accountability for public funds through Parliament. France adopts a 'public institution' governance structure. The Louvre is not merely a state-run institution but operates as the 'Louvre Museum Public Institution,' possessing independent legal status. This structure allows the state to maintain ownership and final supervisory authority while granting autonomy in budget execution, personnel, and exhibition planning. It is more flexible than direct state administration but allows for greater state intervention than the U.K.'s board model, representing a middle-ground governance structure. Germany operates national cultural institutions based on a 'foundation' governance structure. For instance, the National Museums of Berlin are not individual institutions but are integrated under the 'Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation,' which encompasses five institutions, including the National Museums of Berlin, the National Library, the Secret State Archives, the Ibero-American Institute, and the National Institute for Music Research. This system was established after royal collections were converted into public foundations in 1918. This foundation model, funded jointly by the federal and state governments, emphasizes integrated planning and resource allocation over the independent management of individual museums, differing from the U.K. and French models. Japan employs an 'Independent Administrative Institution (IAA)' governance structure. Introduced as part of administrative reforms aimed at achieving a 'small government with high efficiency' in 2001, it shares similarities with South Korea's responsible management agencies and some public institutions, but it has been criticized for leading to the decline of Japanese museums. The Tokyo National Museum is operated by the National Cultural Properties Organization, an independent administrative institution that encompasses national museums and cultural property research institutes, including local museums in Kyoto, Nara, and Kyushu. The IAA system separates national museums from central government organizations, granting budget and personnel autonomy while allowing the relevant ministry to manage medium-term goals and evaluations. This model is similar to the foundation model in Germany, as it maintains state ownership while delegating management. In February 2026, Japan's Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology presented goals for national museums and art galleries for 2026-2030, stating that if the ratio of self-generated income from admission fees to exhibition project costs falls below 40% by 2029, they would be subject to reorganization, including closure, and would be encouraged to implement a 'dual pricing system' that charges higher fees to foreign tourists. Furthermore, they are required to achieve 100% self-sufficiency by 2031-2035, which has sparked backlash. The Netherlands employs a 'privatized foundation' governance structure. After the completion of privatization, all 24 national museums and galleries were incorporated as foundations, still receiving subsidies from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. While ownership of buildings and collections remains with the state, some have completely removed the designation of 'national' or 'municipal,' although they retain the title of 'National Gallery.' Through administrative reforms in the 1990s, national galleries were 'decentralized,' with the government entrusting operations to independent foundations while reducing subsidies, granting discretion over marketing and private fundraising. The growth of the National Gallery and the Van Gogh Museum into global tourist brands is rooted in this reform of governance structures. These museums rely on government subsidies for over 70% of their total budgets, and to ensure continued accountability to the minister, all foundation charters stipulate that amendments cannot be made without the minister's approval. ◆ The Future and Governance of National Cultural Institutions The issue of governance structures in national cultural institutions is not merely an organizational management problem. It expresses the government's philosophy and vision regarding culture and the arts and how it intends to shape the future civilization of South Korea. Nevertheless, major cultural institutions such as the National Theater, the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, the National Museum, the Seoul Arts Center, and the National World Writing Museum are each placed under different legal statuses and governance structures, making it difficult to establish consistent and directional policies. Therefore, the issue of governance structures is both unavoidable and timely. Given the realities in Korea, it is challenging to adopt any one of the governance models discussed earlier directly. Korea has a strong centralized administrative culture built on a civil law tradition, so forcibly introducing the British trust board model or the Dutch privatization model could lead to financial instability and cultural dissonance due to the absence of a donation culture and a tradition of civic boards. However, it is also not feasible to maintain a direct state administration system. The appointment of heads of institutions and program directions have fluctuated with each regime change, and the scars of political interference, such as the blacklist incidents, have been painful lessons from the past. Most national cultural institutions cannot sustain their operating costs solely through private funding, making government financial support an unavoidable prerequisite for the time being. Considering these conditions, the most realistic alternative for Korea is to cautiously propose a hybrid model based on the French public institution type, incorporating elements of performance management from the Japanese model. This is because a public institution type allows the government to bear financial responsibility while providing legal status and an independent board to prevent government or bureaucratic interference in personnel and program decisions, thus satisfying both the demands for government-dependent financial structures and political independence. Secondly, since incorporation alone will not completely resolve the politicization of leadership appointments, legalizing medium-term management goals and external evaluation committees in the Japanese style could ensure continuity of operations regardless of regime changes. Thirdly, while the integrated foundation model, like the German model, is attractive in terms of policy consistency, it poses a significant risk of bloating and rigidity in management due to the diverse nature of the institutions already under its umbrella, such as performing arts, visual arts, museums, and libraries. Therefore, it may be reasonable to prioritize the incorporation of individual institutions while establishing small advisory committees for specific sectors, such as visual arts and performing arts, as needed. Of course, there will be differing opinions on these conclusions. Some argue that given the deeply rooted bureaucratic control practices in Korea, mere incorporation will not guarantee substantial autonomy, suggesting that if a compromise is to be made, the British board model should be adopted, with institutional mechanisms ensuring substantial participation from the arts community and civil society in the board nomination process. Conversely, those emphasizing financial soundness may argue for a gradual attempt at Dutch-style foundation models for institutions like the National Museum of Korea or the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, which already have a certain visitor base and self-revenue structure. This perspective strongly suggests that a differentiated approach reflecting the varying degrees of financial independence and political sensitivity of each institution is necessary, rather than seeking a single solution. However, the issue of governance structures for national cultural institutions can no longer be postponed. The reason national cultural institutions in Korea must establish a unified governance structure is that it is the minimum condition for ensuring the consistency and unity of national cultural policy. Politicians often quote Kim Gu's phrase, "What I desire most is the power of high culture," from his 'My Wish.' Yet, their understanding and commitment to culture rarely resonate. The reason their words often sound hollow is that they cannot even resolve the governance structure of national cultural institutions. It is perplexing why the government, which is currently enjoying a surplus from the semiconductor boom and contemplating its allocation, is particularly stingy in the cultural sector and hesitant about nurturing talent, leaving cultural welfare to individuals. While the government is aware of the prioritization of budgets for welfare and security and the difficulty of quantifying the outcomes of cultural and artistic investments, such challenges cannot justify postponing governance restructuring. Rather, a clear governance structure is a prerequisite for efficient budget execution and performance management, making the current passive attitude a reversal of cause and effect. Ultimately, the restructuring of governance for national cultural institutions is not a problem that can be solved by simply transplanting a model from another country. It requires designing a system that can incorporate Korea's administrative traditions, financial realities, and urgent demands for political independence. A framework based on France's public institution model or the U.K.'s non-departmental public body, enhanced with a performance management system for transparency, and a sophisticated approach that varies the degree of autonomy according to the nature of the institution is the direction that Korean cultural administration should pursue.* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:20:00
  • Kakao Entertainment Merges Three Subsidiaries to Strengthen IP Competitiveness
    Kakao Entertainment Merges Three Subsidiaries to Strengthen IP Competitiveness Kakao Entertainment is consolidating its subsidiaries to enhance its story intellectual property (IP) business competitiveness.On August 14, Kakao Entertainment announced the merger of its subsidiaries Samyang C&C, InTime, and Pilyeon Management. According to the company, the boards of directors for each subsidiary approved the merger on August 12, with plans to complete the process by the end of the year.All three companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of Kakao Entertainment. The merged entity will keep the name 'Samyang C&C,' and Cha Seong-taek, the current CEO of Samyang C&C, will lead the new organization.Kakao Entertainment's predecessor, KakaoPage, acquired a 49.97% stake in Samyang C&C in January 2018. Following additional acquisitions, it purchased the remaining 30% stake for 24 billion won in January 2021, making Samyang C&C a wholly owned subsidiary. In March of the same year, KakaoPage merged with KakaoM and rebranded as Kakao Entertainment.The merger aims to strengthen the competitiveness of story IP and improve operational efficiency. The companies plan to integrate their expertise in webtoon and web novel planning and production, enhancing their capabilities in the novel-comic genre that bridges web novels and webtoons.Kakao Entertainment is focusing on developing high-quality IP across various genres, including romance, fantasy, and martial arts, to secure mega IPs with strong fan bases. This will further strengthen its story IP pipeline.Samyang C&C, InTime, and Pilyeon Management are content providers specializing in webtoons and web novels. They have expertise in planning and producing story IP across a wide range of genres, including romance fantasy and traditional martial arts, as well as expanding web novels into webtoons. They are particularly strong in diversifying IP into secondary creations such as dramas and animations.These three companies have built their competitiveness based on their comprehensive know-how in the IP business, from discovering new authors to planning and producing webtoon and web novel works, as well as publishing, merchandise, and expanding into secondary creations like dramas and animations.Samyang C&C's fantasy work 'The Spirit King Elquiness' is recognized as a notable novel-comic IP that has expanded from web novel to webtoon. The combined views of webtoons and web novels on KakaoPage and KakaoWebtoon have reached a total of 340 million. It is also available on Piccoma, operated by KakaoPiccoma in Japan.A Kakao Entertainment representative stated, “Through the merger of these three companies, we will focus on planning and discovering competitive IP across various genres, solidifying our story business and strengthening our global competitive IP pipeline.”* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:08:00
  • Hwacheon County to Host Humanities Lectures Featuring Professor Choi Chang-ryul
    Hwacheon County to Host Humanities Lectures Featuring Professor Choi Chang-ryul Hwacheon County in Gangwon Province will host a series of humanities lectures featuring Professor Choi Chang-ryul from Yongin University on the 24th and 31st of this month.According to Hwacheon County on the 14th, the first lecture will take place at 6:30 PM on the 24th at the Hwacheon Community Center. The second lecture is scheduled for 6:30 PM on the 31st at the Saneum Comprehensive Cultural Center.Professor Choi, who is also a commentator on various broadcasting programs, will lead the event.The program will be divided into two parts. In the first part, Professor Choi will discuss the theme of 'Coexistence in Hwacheon,' focusing on cooperation among community members and the role of the community.The second part will feature a talk show with Professor Choi, Hwacheon County Mayor Kim Se-hoon, and local residents. This segment aims to facilitate communication among attendees regarding local issues and the future of Hwacheon.Hwacheon County's monthly humanities lectures are designed to broaden cultural opportunities for residents while providing a public forum for experts, residents, and local government to discuss regional challenges.Notably, the expansion of the lecture venues beyond Hwacheon-eup to include Saneum enhances accessibility for residents. It remains to be seen whether this initiative will establish a communication channel for sharing diverse opinions among residents with local governance and the community.* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:08:00
  • Large Corporations Accelerate AI and Semiconductor Subsidiary Integration
    Large Corporations Accelerate AI and Semiconductor Subsidiary Integration In the past three months, major South Korean conglomerates have actively integrated subsidiaries focused on artificial intelligence (AI) data centers, semiconductors, and silicon anode materials, aiming to enter high-value future industries. During this period, the total number of affiliated companies decreased by four as non-core businesses were streamlined.The Fair Trade Commission released data on August 14 detailing changes in the number of companies affiliated with large conglomerates over the last three months. The report covers companies belonging to conglomerates with assets exceeding 5 trillion won from May to July of this year.The number of companies affiliated with 102 large conglomerates fell from 3,538 on May 1 to 3,534 on August 3, a decrease of four. During this time, 49 conglomerates experienced changes in their affiliated companies. A total of 75 companies were newly integrated into 35 conglomerates through the establishment of 52 new companies and the acquisition of nine others. Conversely, 79 companies were removed from 28 conglomerates due to mergers, sales, and liquidations.The conglomerates with the most new subsidiaries included Hyosung with 11, GS with nine, and Daemyung Chemical with seven. DB had the highest number of companies removed from its affiliation, totaling 13, followed by Hyosung with eight and SK with seven.Companies are restructuring their business portfolios by divesting non-core operations. SK excluded five companies, including SK D&D, which is involved in real estate development, from its affiliates. CJ removed two companies, including CJ Feed & Care, a manufacturer of animal feed, while Wonik excluded three companies, including the film production company Plady.In contrast, there has been significant activity in establishing companies and acquiring stakes in future industries such as AI and semiconductors. Samsung integrated the public-private joint venture Korea AI Computing Center and cooling and air conditioning solutions company Flakt Group Korea into its subsidiaries for its AI data center business.GS added four AI infrastructure-related companies, including GS AI Infrastructure, while OCI integrated SG Data Power and SG AI Infrastructure. Hansol included semiconductor inspection parts manufacturer Wiltech Technology as a subsidiary, and Hyosung added HS Hyosung Energy Solutions Korea, a silicon anode material manufacturer, to its portfolio.There were also exclusions of companies controlled by relatives or executives of the same individual. Line, which was newly designated as a large conglomerate this year, excluded four companies, including Shindo, which is controlled by relatives. Woongjin excluded four companies controlled by relatives and executives, while Heesung excluded three companies controlled by executives, and QCP Group excluded one company controlled by an executive through methods such as recognizing independent management, resignations, and liquidations.Among existing conglomerates, Jungheung Construction excluded KI Consulting, Hyosung excluded six companies including Jeil Industrial, and Banholings excluded three companies including W&Partners through recognition of independent management of relatives. 2026-08-14 10:04:10
  • LG and NVIDIA Accelerate AI Partnership, Set to Launch Humanoid Robot in Q1 2027
    LG and NVIDIA Accelerate AI Partnership, Set to Launch Humanoid Robot in Q1 2027 LG and NVIDIA are intensifying their strategic collaboration across future industries, including robotics, artificial intelligence (AI) factories, and mobility. LG plans to unveil a bipedal humanoid robot in the first quarter of 2027, leveraging NVIDIA's AI platform alongside its own capabilities in electronics, batteries, communications, and IT.On August 13, LG announced that it signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for strategic business cooperation with NVIDIA at NVIDIA's headquarters in Santa Clara, California.The event was attended by LG Chairman Koo Kwang-mo, Chief Operating Officer Kwon Bong-seok, LG Electronics CEO Ryu Jae-cheol, LG Uplus CEO Hong Beom-sik, LG CNS CEO Hyun Shin-kyun, LG Science Park CEO Jeong Soo-hun, and LG AI Research Institute co-director Lee Hong-rak, among other executives. NVIDIA's founder and CEO Jensen Huang and other top executives were also present.This MOU follows a meeting between the two companies' CEOs in June at LG Twin Towers in Yeouido, Seoul. The partnership aims to go beyond simple technology exchanges and solution provision, focusing on joint technology development and commercialization in three key areas: robotics, AI factories, and mobility.The first visible outcome will be in robotics. LG aims to develop a next-generation bipedal humanoid robot based on NVIDIA's open humanoid foundation model, Isaac GR00T, with a target release in the first quarter of 2027.The humanoid robot will incorporate NVIDIA's Jetson Thor for advanced reasoning and control. Key technologies from LG's subsidiaries, including actuators from LG Electronics, sensors from LG Innotek, and batteries from LG Energy Solution, will be integrated. This strategy, termed 'One LG,' combines NVIDIA's AI capabilities with LG's hardware strengths.LG will also conduct on-site demonstrations for the commercialization of the robot. This year, LG Electronics plans to deploy the wheeled robot 'LG CLOiD' on the washing machine production line at its factory in Tennessee for proof of concept. Future plans include expanding the application of robots to global production facilities as well as residential and commercial spaces.Additionally, the companies will collaborate on building a physical AI data factory using LG CNS's robot platform, PhysicalWorks. Data and experiences gathered from the field will enhance the performance of LG's self-developed Robot Foundation Model (RFM).In the AI factory sector, they aim to target the global market based on NVIDIA's DSX architecture. This will integrate LG Electronics' cooling technology, LG Energy Solution's batteries, and the design and operational capabilities of LG CNS and LG Uplus, along with LS's power solutions.In the first half of next year, they plan to establish an AI factory reference site to validate LG's cooling, power, and IT technologies based on NVIDIA's next-generation AI platform, Vera Rubin. By the first half of 2028, they aim to expand this site to 80 megawatts in Cheonan, South Korea, utilizing prefab modular designs to reduce construction time by over 20%.This foundation will enable them to actively pursue contracts for AI infrastructure targeting global big tech companies, offering an integrated AI factory solution from design to construction and operation as a 'One LG' package.In the mobility sector, they will develop a high-performance computing platform for next-generation AI-defined vehicles (AIDV) by combining NVIDIA's Drive Hyperion platform with LG's in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) and software capabilities.This initiative will expand LG's automotive business from IVI to autonomous driving. The goal is to supply solutions that integrate autonomous driving features and AI services within vehicles to global automakers, creating new business opportunities.The two companies will form a joint task force to collaborate throughout the research and development, on-site demonstration, and commercialization processes. LG aims to secure references that combine NVIDIA's AI ecosystem with its subsidiaries' manufacturing and hardware capabilities, establishing new standards for the physical AI era.Chairman Koo stated, "As our collaboration accelerates, the tasks we will tackle together in AI factories, physical AI, and mobility have become clear. We will expedite the spread of AI by building industry-leading references."CEO Huang remarked, "Building on years of collaboration, LG's leadership in product engineering and manufacturing combined with NVIDIA's technology is propelling us into a new era of robotics, AI factories, and autonomous vehicles." 2026-08-14 10:04:10
  • LG Display Launches Technology Academy to Foster R&D and Manufacturing Talent
    LG Display Launches 'Technology Academy' to Foster R&D and Manufacturing Talent LG Display is accelerating its transformation into a 'technology-centric company' by enhancing the development of technical talent and collaboration systems.On August 14, LG Display announced the launch of its online integrated platform, the 'Technology Academy,' aimed at nurturing technical talent.The Technology Academy is designed to systematize the experience and know-how accumulated in R&D and manufacturing into organizational technical assets, supporting the enhancement of employees' job expertise and technical capabilities. The goal is to create a virtuous cycle that connects individual growth with the organization's technological competitiveness.The platform consists of nine organizational 'colleges,' including five in the R&D sector and four in manufacturing. Each college offers a growth roadmap detailing job-specific experiences, required competencies, and development directions, along with integrated training programs based on expertise levels.Programs tailored to the characteristics of each organization, such as sharing best practices, expert lectures, and mentoring, will also be implemented. This is to ensure that employees can systematically develop the necessary competencies according to their job roles and expertise levels.Additionally, a personalized growth support feature utilizing generative artificial intelligence (AI) has been introduced. The AI analyzes individual personnel data to automatically generate growth reports and provide tailored training information based on job-specific growth roadmaps. Leaders will receive insights and interview guides necessary for developing their team members.A network of experts has also been established to facilitate technical exchanges between organizations. Information on the areas of expertise and key activities of in-house technical expert groups, such as 'research specialists' and 'technical sponsors,' will be provided, allowing employees to seek technical advice and support from the relevant experts.Through the Technology Academy, LG Display aims to strengthen its technology-driven organizational culture. The company plans to disseminate the technological assets from R&D and manufacturing across the organization, creating an environment where technical talent can focus on their core tasks while being recognized for their technical challenges and achievements.Lee Gi-sang, Chief Human Resources Officer of LG Display, stated, "Differentiated technological competitiveness ultimately starts with people. We will create an environment where our members can continuously grow through the Technology Academy and will further strengthen our efforts to nurture the technical talent that will drive future growth."* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:04:00
  • Ministry of Trade Launches AI Training for Senior Officials to Accelerate Transition
    Ministry of Trade Launches AI Training for Senior Officials to Accelerate Transition The Ministry of Trade is initiating artificial intelligence (AI) transition (AX) training for senior officials at the manager level and above. The aim is to accelerate the transition to an 'AI Native Ministry' by ensuring that policymakers leading the manufacturing AX (M.AX) understand the latest technological trends and industrial changes.On August 14 and 18, the Ministry will hold AX lectures at the Government Sejong Center for senior officials. Since launching the 'M.AX Alliance' in September 2025, which includes manufacturing companies, AI firms, universities, and research institutions, the Ministry has been promoting AX as a core strategy across all sectors of manufacturing.This training is designed to help officials who make M.AX policies and lead organizations understand AI technology trends and the direction of changes in the manufacturing sector, enabling them to effectively reflect this knowledge in policy and organizational operations. The curriculum covers a wide range of topics, including the latest AI trends, strategic perspectives on manufacturing AX, and practical applications of AI in the workplace.On August 14, Kim Ji-hyun, Vice President of the SK AI Committee, will discuss 'Latest AI Trends and Leadership Competencies,' explaining key technological developments such as generative AI and AI agents, as well as the role of leaders in guiding organizations. Additionally, Choi Jae-sik, a professor at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), will present on 'Implementing National Industrial Strategies through Manufacturing AI,' examining policies and corporate trends in major countries and suggesting responses for domestic manufacturing.On August 18, Jeon Byeong-wook, Director of the Korea Automotive Technology Institute, will forecast the changes that physical AI will bring to industrial structures in his talk titled 'A New Era of Intelligence Opened by Physical AI.' Now Hyun, head of the AIX Strategy Office at KAIST, will introduce the characteristics of major generative AI tools and their applications in various work settings, focusing on safe usage.This training is seen as a step towards not only supporting the manufacturing AI transition in the field but also transforming the internal work processes of the Ministry to be more AI-centered in policy design and execution. By enhancing the AI understanding of policy officials, the Ministry aims to more swiftly reflect technological changes and corporate demands in its policies.The Ministry plans to use this training to improve officials' understanding of manufacturing AX and to faithfully incorporate changes in the industrial field into its policies, thereby accelerating the implementation of M.AX.Minister Kim Jeong-kwan stated, 'M.AX is about innovating both the production methods of companies and the direction of government policy in manufacturing. By first understanding AX trends, officials must lead the transition of organizations and policies to achieve tangible results that can be felt in the field swiftly.'* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:04:00
  • Government Reports Continued Economic Recovery Amid Ongoing Middle East Risks
    Government Reports Continued Economic Recovery Amid Ongoing Middle East Risks The government has recently assessed that South Korea's economy is showing signs of improvement, particularly in exports and consumption. However, it noted that challenges related to high prices and employment difficulties for vulnerable groups persist due to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.The Ministry of Finance released its 'Recent Economic Trends (Green Book) for August' on the 14th, stating, "Our economy has seen a significant increase in exports and improvements in domestic consumption, reinforcing the trend of economic recovery. However, the pressure of rising prices due to high oil prices from the Middle East and the difficult employment conditions for vulnerable groups continue to burden the public."Exports surged by 62.8% year-on-year last month, largely driven by strong performance in semiconductors, a key export item. The total export value reached $98.89 billion, with increases also noted in the exports of computers and ships. The average daily export value in July was $4.12 billion, marking a 69.6% increase compared to the same month last year.Production saw steady growth across both the mining and service sectors. Overall industrial production rose by 2.3% in June compared to the previous month, with mining (6.4%), construction (4.1%), and services (0.7%) contributing to the overall increase. However, public administration experienced a decline of 4.0%.Consumer sentiment also showed signs of improvement. Private consumption in the second quarter increased by 0.4% compared to the previous quarter and by 2.5% year-on-year. Retail sales in June rose by 2.7% from the previous month, driven by increases in durable goods (12.6%) and non-durable goods (0.2%).A Ministry of Finance official commented, "While the rise in the consumer sentiment index and retail sales in July are positive indicators, the decline in domestic sales of locally produced cars may act as a negative factor."In June, the current account recorded a surplus of $49.73 billion, continuing the trend of a trade surplus. The service account saw a reduction in its deficit as the travel balance recorded surpluses for two consecutive months. The income account surplus expanded due to an increase in dividend income.Despite the impact of the Middle East conflict, consumer prices, which had fluctuated around 3%, showed some stabilization. Last month, consumer prices rose by 2.8% compared to a year earlier. The government attributed the slight decrease from the previous month to measures such as the maximum price system for petroleum products, which helped curb the rise in oil prices. The core inflation index, excluding food and energy, increased by 2.6% compared to the same period last year, driven by rising personal services.As of July, the number of employed individuals increased by 108,000 compared to the same month last year, marking two consecutive months of growth. However, the youth demographic and sectors such as manufacturing and construction showed signs of weakness. A Ministry of Finance official explained, "Changes in hiring practices have led to a preference for experienced hires over large-scale public recruitment, making it difficult for young people entering the labor market for the first time. Additionally, structural challenges such as automation in manufacturing are contributing to these difficulties."The won-dollar exchange rate stood at 1,424.0 won at the end of July, showing a decline from the end of the previous month.However, the financial market could not escape a downward trend. The KOSPI closed at 6,595.45, down 22.19 points from the end of the previous month, while the KOSDAQ fell by 21.44 points to 719.76.A Ministry of Finance official stated, "The global economy continues to show moderate growth, but uncertainties related to the Middle East conflict and U.S. tariff measures remain. We will ensure the management of supply and demand for key items and prioritize the safety of public livelihoods to minimize the impact of the Middle East conflict."* This article has been translated by AI. 2026-08-14 10:04:00