Purpose: In recent years, the keyword that penetrates our society is the 4th Industrial Revolution. The 4th In-dustrial Revolution can be expressed in many ways, but the most important keyword is “connection”, and the key phenomenon from the perspective of this connection is the development of AI. The 4th Industrial Revolution and the impact of artificial intelligence are more than we think, and each academic division in society is discussing how to respond to it, and criminal law is no exception. In particular, fierce debate continues as to whether the criminal law will recognize the criminal subjectivity of AI, and whether punishment for artificial intelligence will be possible. With the development of AI, infringement of legal interests, whether intentional or unintentional, can become a reality. When users and developers intention-ally use artificial intelligence for crimes, AI becomes a human tool. The question is how to deal criminally with cases where legal interests are violated by intellectual activities or source code errors of AI, although not intended by users or developers. However, the premise to think about this is that AI technology is not complete. In other words, in the event of unintentional infringement of legal interests by AI, punishing humans based on this can have a contraction effect on development, resulting in a regression of AI technology with clear social utility. Method: Therefore, this study examines how the criminal law should respond in the event of infringement of legal interests while human factors by AI is excluded. To this end, we first look at the current status of criminal law responding to AI. Here, we will first examine whether a specific operation of AI will be included in an act that is the scope of criminal law, and, if so, whether to recognize criminal identity to AI that caused such a specific operation. Results: Through this process, the specific operation of AI can be subject to criminal law, and furthermore, if there is an infringement of legal interests by AI, it is confirmed that there is room for a crime. However, it is as-sumed that the action of AI is only unintentional infringement in which human elements are excluded. AI infringes on legal interests by human factors because it has the same meaning as human tools. Conclusion: Since the ongoing development of AI technology can hinder the development of artificial intelligence technology with clear social effectiveness, it argued that the criminal law should be supplemented after administrative procedures.
2. The Background of Research on Artificial Intelligence Regulation Legislation
3. Criminal Proceedings for Infringement of Legal Interests by Artificial Intelligence are Initiated