SEOUL, November 15 (AJP) - The top scorer in South Korea's national tax accountant examination has admitted using artificial intelligence to cheat on both stages of the test, as well as a separate certified public accountant exam, exposing gaps in the supervision of professional licensing exams.
The candidate, whose identity was withheld, said Sunday in a YouTube interview with a lawyer that he had used a miniature camera to photograph exam questions, sent them to a generative AI system and checked the answers on his smartphone.
"I used the same method to cheat on the first stage of the certified public accountant exam," he said, adding that he had submitted a written confession to the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency along with plans to hand over remaining devices and evidence.
Police have launched an investigation into the case.
The Human Resources Development Service of Korea (HRDK), which administers the tax accountant examination, said two supervisors were assigned to each test room. The candidate sat in the second row during the first-stage exam and the front row during the second, both near the supervisors.
Despite his proximity, none of the four supervisors interviewed by the agency reported suspicious behavior. The agency also acknowledged that candidates were instructed to turn off their phones and keep them in their bags, rather than surrender them before the exam.
HRDK said it was reviewing whether to revoke the candidate's qualification.
The scandal emerged after the candidate publicized unusually high scores, including perfect marks in three of four subjects in the first-stage examination. He answered 159 of 160 questions correctly.
The candidate apologized to fellow test-takers and industry professionals, saying he had cheated in hopes of making his parents proud.
Candice Kim
Candice Kim is a dedicated business and technology reporter specializing in the intersection of high-tech innovation and fast-paced consumer trends. Her core beats span the semiconductor, IT, cosmetics, and retail sectors, where she provides in-depth coverage of industry titans including Samsung Electronics, SK hynix, and LG Electronics, alongside leading consumer brands like Olive Young and Musinsa. Whether analyzing complex silicon supply chains or tracking the latest shifts in beauty and fashion retail, Candice is committed to delivering sharp, accurate reporting that keeps readers informed on the forces shaping today's most dynamic markets.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.
Related News
-
HD Hyundai Launches 600-Ton Unmanned Surface Vessel Developed with Anduril
HD Hyundai has launched a 600-ton unmanned surface vessel targeting the U.S. unmanned vessel market.On November 15, HD Hyundai announced that it held a launch ceremony for the unmanned surface vessel, developed in collaboration with U.S. defense company Anduril, at its shipyard in Ulsan.Attending the ceremony were Ju Won-ho, President of HD Hyundai Heavy Industries; Lee Sang-bong, Executive Vice President; Matt Grimm, Chief Operating Officer of Anduril; Shane Annett, Senior Vice President of Anduril's Maritime and Maneuver Systems Division; John Kim, Anduril Korea Representative; and approximately 70 other executives and staff from both companies, along with representatives from the U.S. military and embassy.The vessel launched is a medium-sized unmanned surface vessel (ASV) with a displacement of 600 tons, built by HD Hyundai.Typically, ship construction takes several years, but this project was completed in just one year following the signing of the agreement in November 2025.The unmanned surface vessel is set to undergo sea trials and final preparations off the coast of Ulsan before continuing test operations in the U.S. early next year.This vessel, constructed by HD Hyundai Heavy Industries and Anduril, is equipped with HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering's self-developed total autonomy solution, VAone, and Anduril's mission autonomy solution, Lattice.VAone automates the operation of the vessel's main systems and integrates an autonomous system for responding to anomalies, as well as an unmanned and autonomous operation system that detects and avoids safety-related anomalies. This includes a damage autonomy solution and an automated navigation solution from Ibis.By combining Anduril's Lattice platform, the technology for autonomous unmanned surface vessels has been completed, automating navigation, system operations, damage control, and weapon operations.The vessel is expected to meet U.S. Navy requirements for long-term operations without crew, enabling it to perform various missions such as reconnaissance, surveillance, and maritime information collection. Considering that approximately 50 crew members are typically required for manned vessels of similar size, this development is anticipated to significantly reduce the operational burden on naval personnel and enhance operational efficiency.Ju Won-ho, President of HD Hyundai Heavy Industries, stated, "The launch of this unmanned surface vessel is a result of combining HD Hyundai's shipbuilding capabilities with unmanned navigation technology. We will continue to advance our technology to secure a leading position in the unmanned surface vessel market."Shane Annett, Senior Vice President of Anduril, remarked, "This vessel demonstrates what Anduril and HD Hyundai can achieve through collaboration. We look forward to validating the vessel's performance and capabilities in U.S. waters early next year and to continuously expanding our fleet with HD Hyundai."* This article has been translated by AI.
-
Hyundai Home Shopping Introduces Industry's First 100% AI Broadcasting System
Hyundai Home Shopping has become the first in the industry to introduce a system that produces entire broadcasts using artificial intelligence (AI) without hosts or camera filming. This initiative aims to significantly reduce production costs while diversifying the way product information is conveyed, accelerating the digital transformation of home shopping broadcasts. On the 15th, Hyundai Home Shopping announced the full implementation of its 100% AI broadcasting system, named 'AI-REAL,' on its data shopping channel, 'Hyundai Home Shopping Plus Shop.' The first regular broadcast will feature the sale of 'Jeju Heart Gold Kiwi' at 3:20 PM on the 16th. AI-REAL is a system where AI generates both voice and video without human hosts or camera work. While there have been instances in the home shopping industry where AI was used for hosts or specific scenes, this marks the first time an entire broadcast is produced using AI, according to the company.The advantages of AI broadcasting include cost savings and a variety of ways to present product information. Previously, separate filming was required to showcase the soil conditions or distribution processes of agricultural products, but these can now be represented through AI-generated videos. This approach aims to help consumers better understand the production environment and characteristics of the products.Im Soo-jin, head of broadcasting production at Hyundai Home Shopping, explained, “In a recent test broadcast conducted before the official launch, costs incurred by partner companies for sample preparation and insert video production were reduced by over 80% compared to previous methods, and sales reached 120% of our target.” She added, “Customer reactions have been just as positive as those for broadcasts featuring real people, with feedback indicating that the diverse information on cultivation environments and cooking examples has aided in purchase decisions.” Recently, the home shopping industry has been expanding the use of AI through AI hosts, virtual studios, and automated video production. GS Shop and Lotte Home Shopping have established AI content production guidelines, while NS Home Shopping is also increasing broadcasts featuring AI hosts. Hyundai Home Shopping plans to regularize AI broadcasts focused on agricultural, livestock, and fishery products at least once a month. The scope will later expand to include processed foods and living products, which are in high demand from small partner companies. Im Hyun-tae, head of the channel strategy division at Hyundai Home Shopping, stated, “We developed this AI broadcasting generation system to foster collaboration with small partner companies and provide customers with a differentiated shopping experience. We will continue to actively integrate AI technology into our operations to accelerate the pace of AI transformation.”* This article has been translated by AI.
-
After Jensen Huang, Nvidia faces a test of leadership
Graphics AI assisted SEOUL, November 15 (AJP) - A remarkable fracture has emerged within the company that helped make the artificial intelligence revolution possible. One executive wanted to move faster toward the future. Another was responsible for examining the financial risks of that acceleration. One was Jensen Huang, the visionary co-founder of Nvidia. The other was Colette Kress, the chief financial officer who had helped guide the company's finances through thirteen years of extraordinary growth. Their reported disagreements, followed by Huang's departure and Kress's appointment as interim chief executive, raise questions far larger than the leadership of a single corporation. How fast can artificial intelligence advance? How much capital can the world commit to its development? Who ultimately bears the risks of the extraordinary financial structures supporting that growth? And, most importantly, can human beings develop the wisdom and institutions necessary to govern the technological power they have created? These are not merely questions of corporate finance. They are questions about the future of civilization. A Deer in the Headlights On November 12, 2026, Nvidia announced that Jensen Huang had resigned as president, chief executive officer and a member of its board. Colette Kress, who had served as CFO since 2013, became interim CEO while retaining her financial responsibilities. Harvey C. Jones was appointed chairman of the board. The departure marked an extraordinary transition for a company whose identity had been inseparable from its founder for thirty-three years. The following day, the New York Post reported on tensions between Huang and Kress, drawing on reporting by The Wall Street Journal and Reuters. According to those accounts, Huang had interrupted Kress during an August management meeting and compared her to a deer caught in the headlights of an approaching car. The remark remains a reported account rather than an independently established statement acknowledged by both executives. Yet the conflict it symbolizes deserves serious consideration. Huang was a leader who imagined the future before much of the world recognized its possibilities. He helped transform graphics processing technology into the computational foundation of modern artificial intelligence. Through hardware, software, networking and data-center systems, he built an industrial ecosystem that reshaped the global technology economy. Kress represented another indispensable dimension of that achievement: financial discipline. A visionary chief executive must recognize opportunities that others cannot yet see. A responsible financial executive must ask whether the organization can afford the risks required to pursue those opportunities. These responsibilities are not enemies. They are complementary forms of intelligence. The accelerator moves a vehicle forward. The brake allows it to reach its destination safely. A car equipped with only one of them cannot fulfill its purpose. The same is true of a great corporation. Innovation requires courage. Sustainability requires restraint. Leadership requires the judgment to reconcile the two. It would be misleading to portray Kress as an opponent of Nvidia's growth. She was a central participant in building and financing that growth. The more important question is whether a company can preserve genuine disagreement and independent risk assessment when its founder has become an almost mythic figure. The Money Behind the AI Revolution The artificial intelligence revolution is often described through the language of technological breakthroughs. We hear about increasingly powerful processors, sophisticated reasoning models, autonomous machines and data centers capable of performing extraordinary calculations. But behind every technological breakthrough lies an economic reality. Advanced chips must be designed and manufactured. Data centers must be constructed. Electricity must be generated and delivered. Cooling systems, networks, land and specialized equipment must be financed. The cost is immense. Where does the money come from? Some comes from corporate profits. Some comes from shareholders. Some comes from banks, bonds and institutional investors. Increasingly, another arrangement has attracted attention: suppliers of AI infrastructure helping to finance the customers who purchase that infrastructure. A semiconductor company may invest in a customer or support its borrowing. The customer uses the resulting financial capacity to build data centers and purchase more chips. Those purchases generate additional revenue for the supplier, potentially strengthening its ability to support further expansion. This is the structure often discussed under the term circular financing. It is important to understand what that term does—and does not—mean. Circular financing is not automatically illegal, fraudulent or economically irrational. Supplier financing has existed in industries ranging from aviation to telecommunications. In emerging markets, such arrangements can accelerate investment and help create genuine demand. The critical question is whether the financial structure supports independent, sustainable economic activity or merely brings forward purchases that cannot ultimately be justified by the customer's own revenue. A company may record legitimate sales while its customers remain dependent on continued outside financing. A data center may be fully constructed while its long-term profitability remains uncertain. Investors may celebrate rapid growth while overlooking the financial obligations required to sustain it. The existence of demand is not the same as proof of its durability. This distinction lies at the heart of the current debate over the AI economy. The $105 Billion Question In August 2026, Reuters reported that Nvidia had agreed to provide a guarantee of up to $105 billion in connection with an OpenAI data-center project in Ohio being developed by SB Energy. The company also agreed to invest $1.5 billion in SB Energy. The figures are extraordinary, but they require careful interpretation. The $105 billion was a maximum guarantee, not an amount Nvidia had already paid in cash, nor a confirmed financial loss. The actual exposure would depend on contractual conditions, the project's performance and the value recoverable from the underlying assets. Huang argued that the arrangement should not be characterized simply as circular financing. Nvidia's stated objective was to secure long-lived infrastructure capable of supporting successive generations of AI computing. That strategic rationale deserves consideration. So does the financial risk. If AI data centers generate sufficient revenue, supplier-backed infrastructure financing may prove to be a successful means of expanding productive capacity. If demand disappoints, however, the consequences may extend beyond the data-center operator to lenders, investors and companies providing financial guarantees. What appears to be a virtuous cycle of growth could, under adverse conditions, become a mechanism for transmitting financial stress. Neither blind optimism nor premature declarations of an AI bubble are adequate responses. The world needs a more demanding form of analysis: one that distinguishes genuine productivity from financial engineering, and long-term demand from investment driven primarily by expectations of future demand. In August, Nvidia also disclosed plans involving financial partners to mobilize more than $500 billion in third-party capital for AI infrastructure. Such a target should not be confused with money already invested or obligations fully committed. The difference between an ambition, an agreement, a guarantee and an actual expenditure is fundamental to sound financial journalism. It is equally fundamental to sound corporate governance. Why an Internal Dispute Became a Global Question Nvidia is no ordinary semiconductor company. Its technology sits at the center of a global network of research institutions, cloud providers, AI developers and industrial enterprises. Its decisions influence investment plans across North America, Europe, East Asia and the Middle East. When such a company expands aggressively, the benefits can spread throughout the global economy. New research becomes possible. New services emerge. Businesses improve productivity. Scientific discoveries may accelerate. But deep interconnection also creates vulnerability. If a major AI infrastructure project fails to achieve its expected returns, the effects may travel through suppliers, financial institutions, energy providers and other participants in the industrial ecosystem. The greater the concentration of technological and financial power, the greater the need for independent judgment. This is why the reported disagreements between Huang and Kress matter. They are not simply a story about personality. They illuminate a structural tension between the desire to accelerate technological progress and the responsibility to manage its economic consequences. A founder's extraordinary confidence can create a great enterprise. But confidence cannot replace accountability. A mature corporation must be capable of questioning its most successful leader. Indeed, the more powerful the leader becomes, the more important that capacity becomes. The Dragon That Climbed Too High More than two thousand years before artificial intelligence, the ancient Chinese I Ching, or Book of Changes, offered a warning about the limits of power. Its Qian hexagram contains the phrase: 亢龍有悔 — Kang Long You Hui. The dragon that rises too high will have cause for regret. In East Asian tradition, the dragon represents immense power, transformation and ascent. Yet even the dragon must understand its limits. The teaching does not condemn ambition. Without ambition, civilization would not advance. Rather, it warns that ascent without self-awareness can become the beginning of decline. Jensen Huang was, in many respects, a technological dragon. He helped build a company whose products transformed the world's capacity to compute, learn and innovate. His black leather jacket became an emblem of confidence, engineering audacity and independence from corporate convention. But no symbol of success can eliminate human limitations. A leader who has climbed to extraordinary heights needs more than encouragement to climb higher. He also needs people who can identify danger, question assumptions and recommend restraint. A chief financial officer is one of the people entrusted with that responsibility. The lesson of the I Ching is not that powerful people should be humiliated when they stumble. It is that humility becomes more necessary as power increases. The Strongest Person Is the One Who Masters Himself The ancient Chinese philosopher Laozi expressed an even deeper insight in Chapter 33 of the Tao Te Ching: 知人者智，自知者明。 To know others is wisdom; to know oneself is enlightenment. He continued: 勝人者有力，自勝者強。 One who conquers others possesses strength; one who conquers himself is truly powerful. These words seem remarkably relevant to the age of artificial intelligence. Huang understood how to outperform competitors, attract extraordinary engineers, organize complex technologies and persuade global markets. Yet the ability to win in the marketplace is not identical to the ability to question one's own judgment. Acknowledging the possibility of error is not weakness. Listening to dissent is not a surrender of authority. Reconsidering an ambitious strategy is not necessarily a retreat from innovation. True leadership requires the courage to examine one's own convictions. The central question is not how much power a leader possesses. It is whether that power remains accountable to conscience, evidence and the institutions entrusted with protecting the broader community. Technological acceleration is an achievement. The ability to govern that acceleration is wisdom. An Ancient Korean Insight: Heaven and Earth Within the Human Being There is another philosophical tradition that deserves a place in this global conversation. It comes from Korea. The Cheon Bu Gyeong (天符經), often rendered as the Heavenly Symbol Scripture, is a short text preserved within Korean spiritual and philosophical traditions. Its historical origins, transmission and interpretation remain subjects of scholarly debate. It would therefore be inappropriate to present any single interpretation as an undisputed historical truth. Nevertheless, its symbolic language offers a profound framework for reflecting on humanity's relationship with the universe. The text begins: 一始無始一 — Il Si Mu Si Il. And concludes: 一終無終一 — Il Jong Mu Jong Il. These phrases invite reflection on a cosmic unity that transcends conventional ideas of beginning and ending. At the center of the present discussion stands another expression: 人中天地一 — In Jung Cheon Ji Il. It may be interpreted philosophically as: Within the human being, heaven and earth become one. In this reading, heaven represents moral aspiration, principles and humanity's highest ideals. Earth represents material reality, work, resources and the conditions of survival. The human being stands between them, capable of reconciling the two. Technological innovation begins with a dream. Semiconductors, electricity, data centers and financial capital provide the material means of realizing that dream. But neither dreams nor material resources can determine their own moral purpose. That responsibility belongs to human beings. A technological vision detached from economic reality cannot remain sustainable. A financial system concerned only with safety, and indifferent to human aspiration, may become incapable of supporting progress. Civilization requires a reconciliation between the two. This is one possible contemporary meaning of In Jung Cheon Ji Il. The reported conflict between Huang and Kress illustrates precisely why such reconciliation matters. It is not necessary to declare one executive virtuous and the other misguided. The more important question is whether their different responsibilities can coexist within a system of accountable leadership. A true leader must be able to imagine the heavens. But that leader must also understand the realities of the earth. And above all, the leader must recognize the human consequences of bringing those two worlds together. Humanity, Culture and Nature Artificial intelligence may become one of the most transformative technologies in human history. It can accelerate scientific discovery, improve medical research, broaden access to education and reduce dangerous forms of labor. Yet its success cannot be measured solely by semiconductor sales, data-center capacity or rising stock prices. We must ask whether AI improves the lives of ordinary people. Does it expand opportunity or concentrate wealth and power? Does it strengthen human creativity or weaken the capacity for independent judgment? Does it help societies become more peaceful, or does it intensify competition and conflict? And can its development remain compatible with the natural world on which all human life depends? Data centers require electricity, cooling and physical resources. Advanced semiconductor manufacturing consumes energy and materials. The expansion of computing power therefore carries environmental responsibilities as well as economic opportunities. Humanity, culture and nature cannot be separated. Humanity is the purpose of technology. Culture provides the values through which technology is understood and used. Nature is the foundation that makes every technological and economic activity possible. A civilization that expands computational power while undermining human dignity or exhausting its ecological foundations cannot call itself truly advanced. Food, Work and Dreams Three simple Korean words express another dimension of this philosophy: 밥 · 일 · 꿈 — Bap, Il, Kkum. Food. Work. Dreams. Food represents the material foundation of life: sustenance, economic security and the basic conditions of human dignity. Work represents creation, contribution and responsibility. Through meaningful work, people connect their abilities with the needs of society. Dreams represent imagination, culture and hope. They give human existence a purpose beyond mere survival. A human life requires all three. Food without dreams can become an existence without meaning. Dreams without material security can become impossible to sustain. And prosperity without meaningful work may leave people disconnected from their own creative potential. The same principle applies to the AI economy. Selling semiconductors and generating revenue concerns the material foundations of prosperity. Using AI to improve production and transform labor concerns the world of work. Building a more peaceful, creative and dignified civilization concerns humanity's dreams. The danger is that the global AI industry may become preoccupied with the first of these while neglecting the other two. How many chips have been sold? How much has a company's market value increased? How many billions of dollars have been committed to new data centers? These numbers matter. But numbers cannot substitute for human purpose. The ultimate achievement of artificial intelligence should be judged by the extent to which it advances health, education, security, freedom, creativity and peace. Technology must serve human life. Human life must not become merely an instrument for technological growth. What South Korea Must Learn The questions raised by Nvidia's transition are particularly important for South Korea. Samsung Electronics and SK hynix occupy significant positions in the global supply chain for advanced memory, including high-bandwidth memory used in AI accelerators. The expansion of AI infrastructure creates major opportunities for Korean industry. But Korean companies must look beyond the growth of any single customer. They must understand the financial structures supporting AI infrastructure investment, the strength of underlying demand and the long-term profitability of data-center projects. It is not enough to count the number of facilities being built. Companies must also ask how fully those facilities will be utilized, how customers will finance their purchases and whether future revenues can support the capital invested. Technological competitiveness must be accompanied by financial intelligence, diversified customer relationships and resilient supply chains. Governments face similar responsibilities. Public investment in AI should be based on credible economic assessments and transparent risk management. National ambition must be reconciled with fiscal responsibility and the interests of citizens. Becoming a technological power and becoming a mature civilization are not competing goals. They should be pursued together. What Kind of Leaders Does the AI Age Require? Jensen Huang will remain a consequential figure in the history of artificial intelligence. His contributions to accelerated computing and the modern AI ecosystem cannot be erased by a leadership crisis. Colette Kress, too, has played a significant role in the company's financial development and now faces the difficult responsibility of leading it through a transition. Their reported conflict should not be reduced to a morality play in which one person is entirely right and the other entirely wrong. It should instead encourage a deeper examination of institutions. Can technological visionaries respect the people responsible for managing risk? Can corporate boards exercise independent judgment when a founder becomes extraordinarily powerful? Can investors distinguish sustainable growth from growth dependent on increasingly complex financial arrangements? Can governments pursue technological leadership without abandoning the rule of law, environmental responsibility and the common interests of humanity? These are among the defining questions of the AI age. The I Ching warns of the dragon that rises beyond its limits. The Tao Te Ching teaches that mastery of oneself is greater than victory over others. The Korean Cheon Bu Gyeong, through the phrase In Jung Cheon Ji Il, invites us to imagine a human being capable of reconciling moral aspiration with material reality. Together, these traditions suggest a principle that reaches beyond any single culture. Power without restraint is incomplete. Knowledge without self-knowledge is incomplete. Innovation without responsibility is incomplete. And economic growth without human purpose is incomplete. The future of artificial intelligence will not be determined solely by how quickly machines calculate, how much information they process or how many industries they transform. It will also depend on whether human beings can create institutions wise enough to govern the power of those machines. We need more than powerful AI. We need responsible corporations, sound financial systems, mature leaders and a more peaceful world. The fracture within Nvidia's AI empire therefore presents a question to all of humanity: Having acquired the power to transform the world, have we acquired the wisdom to govern ourselves? 人中天地一 — In Jung Cheon Ji Il. Within the human being, heaven and earth become one. Perhaps the future of leadership begins with that recognition. Perhaps the true spirit of an AI civilization lies there as well. Greater than the semiconductors that move the world is the human conscience. Greater than the power to command the world is the strength to govern oneself. And only when technology and capital serve humanity, culture and nature can artificial intelligence become a genuine advance in human civilization. * The author, Abe Kwak, is the Chairperson of the Asia-Pacific Media Association based in Seoul. ** The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of AJP.