인공지능 세무대리 프로그램의 법적책임

The development of artificial intelligence (“AI”) has posed a threat to the ‘professionals’, such as tax accountants and attorneys. In principle, tax agent service is exclusively provided by accountants or CPAs. Despite such exclusivity, many accountants relied on recording programs to complete recording service, the simplest task within tax agent service. Naturally, many predicted that recording agents will be substituted by recording programs. The prediction was actualized when an AI program performing recording services was launched by the program-using platform providing company. In response, the professionals providing tax agent services began discussions on the legal liability of such artificial intelligence program, specifically its breach of ‘Certified Tax Accountant Act’ and ‘Certified Public Accountant Act.’ While the emergence of AI program has created turbulence within the tax accountants, both the programmers who created this program and the company who has offered the service of AI program do not have any knowledge on recording or accounting services that these programs provide. In essence, the causal relationship between the company and service provided does not exist in this situation. With this situation in mind, the existence of criminal liability pursuant to the ‘Certified Tax Accountant Act’, which states that only those certified can provide tax agent services and any person providing tax agent services without qualification as certified tax accountant shall be punished, should be reviewed. However, the actions by 'weak' AI program such as one performing only limited tax services are not ‘criminally significant actions’, and the programmers and the platform company are not liable because they did not provide the tax agent service, the action at issue. The civil liability of AI program is hard to predict, as the possibility of civil dispute between the service provider or AI program itself and its clients, other than malpractice disputes, is very low. In addition, there is no administrative measure that corresponds to this situation. The possibility of licensing AI programs as certified accountants can also be considered, however as AI program is not a person in any forms in legal system by far, it is meaningless to license them. Instead, authorization process for AI program should be discussed, focusing on review on quality of tax agent service provided. The professionals should also begin their preparation for coexistence with AI programs. Debating on the infringement of certain acts is not a productive method to prepare themselves. Rather, the professionals should effectively commence their preparation by establishing a licensing system for AI programs in order to examine the quality of service provided, allowing only the licensed AI programs to provide tax agent services and modifying the indemnity insurance system to cover services provided by AI programs to protect prospective clients.