What is the primary objective of **K-PIPA**?

**The primary objective of K-PIPA is to protect personal information of Korean residents, prevent misuse, leakage, or theft, and ensure data subjects can exercise their rights while promoting international cooperation.** Enacted September 30, 2011, with key amendments in 2020, 2023 (effective September 15), and 2024, it covers collection, use, storage, disclosure, and destruction of personal information—including pseudonymized data unless irreversibly anonymized—sensitive data (e.g., health, biometrics), and unique identification information (UID) like resident registration numbers (RRNs).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **K-PIPA**?

**All data handlers—domestic public/private entities and foreign operators processing Korean residents' data—are required to comply with K-PIPA.** This includes controllers and outsourcees (processors) handling personal data for business, with extraterritorial reach for foreign entities targeting Koreans via services, monitoring, or substantial impact per 2024 PIPC Guidelines. All must appoint Chief Privacy Officers (CPOs); large entities (e.g., KRW 150B+ revenue, high sensitive volumes) require qualified CPOs with 3+ years experience.

Oes **K-PIPA** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**K-PIPA does not mandate external audits or third-party certification for private entities, but public institutions require Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs) and CPOs oversee internal audits.** Voluntary certifications like ISMS-P facilitate cross-border transfers. Processors must comply via contracts specifying safeguards, with handlers supervising outsourcing chains.

How often should an assessment for **K-PIPA** be performed?

**K-PIPA assessments should be performed regularly, with CPOs conducting internal audits, risk assessments, and reviews aligned to operational changes, supported by 2024 PIPC security Guidelines.** No fixed frequency is prescribed, but breach response, data mapping, and training must be ongoing; public entities submit PIAs within 60 days of registration and every 2 years post-2025.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **K-PIPA**?

**Non-compliance with K-PIPA results in fines up to 3% of annual revenue (capped at KRW 3 billion ≈ €2.1M), surcharges up to 5x damages, corrective orders, and criminal penalties up to 5 years imprisonment.** PIPC enforces via investigations; examples include Google's KRW 70B ($50M) and Meta's KRW 30B fines in 2022 for violations like improper consent.

An **K-PIPA** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, K-PIPA aligns with international frameworks through EU adequacy recognition (December 17, 2021), enabling unrestricted EU-Korea data flows, with similarities in principles like transparency and data minimization.** Differences include consent primacy and no mandatory private Records of Processing Activities; mappings support cross-border via PIPC-approved certifications.

What is the first step to begin implementing **K-PIPA**?

**The first step to implement K-PIPA is appointing a qualified Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) with independence, resources, and board reporting to lead gap analysis and compliance planning.** Follow with data inventory mapping personal/sensitive/UID flows and granular consent mechanisms per PIPC Guidelines.

What is the primary objective of **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**The primary objective of FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is to establish criteria under which the Agency considers electronic records and electronic signatures trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures (§11.1(a)).** This equivalency enables electronic methods while ensuring authenticity, integrity, confidentiality (when appropriate), and non-repudiation through controls in closed (§11.10) and open (§11.30) systems, plus signature requirements (§§11.50–11.300).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**FDA 21 CFR Part 11 applies to organizations using electronic records created, modified, maintained, archived, retrieved, or transmitted under predicate rules, or submitted electronically to FDA (§11.1(b)).** Scope includes firms relying on electronic records in lieu of paper for regulated activities (e.g., pharmaceuticals, devices under 21 CFR 211/820), even if paper exists, and electronic signatures intended as legally binding equivalents. Excludes paper records transmitted electronically; document reliance decisions in SOPs per 2003 guidance.

Does **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**No, FDA 21 CFR Part 11 does not require external audits or third-party certification.** Compliance is demonstrated through internal controls, validation, SOPs, and inspection readiness (§11.1(e)), with systems and documentation readily available for FDA review. FDA exercises enforcement discretion on some elements (e.g., validation per 2003 guidance) but enforces predicate rules; no formal certification exists, unlike ISO standards.

How often should an assessment for **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** be performed?

**FDA 21 CFR Part 11 does not prescribe a fixed frequency for assessments; organizations must perform periodic reviews tied to change control, risk assessments, and predicate rules.** Implement ongoing monitoring via SOPs for access reviews, audit trail checks, training refreshers, and revalidation on changes (§11.10(k)); annual management reviews and mock inspections ensure sustained fitness for use, per GAMP lifecycle principles and 2003 guidance.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**Non-compliance with FDA 21 CFR Part 11 can result in FDA Form 483 observations, warning letters, product holds, recalls, import alerts, injunctions, or civil penalties.** Predicate rule violations remain enforceable despite enforcement discretion on some Part 11 elements (2003 guidance); data integrity failures (e.g., weak audit trails, access controls) trigger actions affecting product quality, as in warning letters citing inadequate OOS investigations and CAPA.

An **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, FDA 21 CFR Part 11 controls can be mapped to frameworks like EU Annex 11 for computerized systems, focusing on shared principles of validation, audit trails, access, and signatures.** Aligns on risk-based approaches, ALCOA+ data integrity, and electronic equivalence; document mappings for global operations to leverage synergies without cross-references in Part 11 scope determinations.

What is the first step to begin implementing **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**The first step to implement FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is to establish a formal applicability framework mapping predicate rules to records and assessing business reliance on electronic versions.** Document scope decisions (e.g., electronic in lieu of paper) in SOPs/specifications per 2003 narrow interpretation guidance, classify systems as closed/open (§11.3), and prioritize high-risk systems for controls.

K-PIPA vs FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Standards Comparison

K-PIPA

Mandatory

2011

South Korea's comprehensive personal data protection regulation

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Mandatory

1997

FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records/signatures

Quick Verdict

K-PIPA mandates comprehensive personal data protection for Korean residents with consent primacy and CPO governance, while FDA 21 CFR Part 11 ensures electronic records' trustworthiness via validation and audit trails for life sciences. Companies adopt them for legal compliance and operational trust.

Data Privacy

K-PIPA

Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA)

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Mandatory independent Chief Privacy Officer appointment
Granular explicit consent for sensitive data transfers
72-hour breach notifications to subjects and regulators
Extraterritorial reach targeting foreign Korean user services
Revenue-based fines up to 3% annual turnover

Electronic Records

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

21 CFR Part 11 Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Electronic records/signatures equivalent to paper/handwritten
Secure time-stamped audit trails for changes
Closed/open system controls with encryption
Unique multi-component electronic signatures
Risk-based validation and access checks

Detailed Analysis

A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

K-PIPA Details

What It Is

K-PIPA, or Personal Information Protection Act, is South Korea's flagship data protection regulation enacted in 2011 with major amendments in 2020, 2023, and 2024. It governs collection, use, storage, transfer, and destruction of personal information, including sensitive data like health and biometrics, for all domestic and foreign data handlers targeting Korean residents. Adopting a consent-centric, risk-based approach, it emphasizes transparency, minimization, and accountability.

Key Components

Core principles: explicit consent, purpose limitation, data minimization.
Mandatory CPO appointment with independence guarantees.
Data subject rights (access, erasure, portability) within 10 days.
Security measures per 2024 PIPC Guidelines (encryption, access controls).
No fixed control count; enforced via PIPC oversight, fines up to 3% revenue.

Why Organizations Use It

Legal compliance avoids fines (e.g., Google's $50M penalty) and imprisonment.
Builds trust, enables EU adequacy data flows.
Mitigates breach risks with 72-hour notifications.
Strategic edge in Asia-Pacific via certifications like ISMS-P.

Implementation Overview

Phased: gap analysis, CPO governance, technical controls, training, audits. Applies to all sizes handling Korean data; no certification but PIPC audits. Involves data mapping, granular consents, vendor DPAs. (178 words)

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is a U.S. regulation defining criteria under which electronic records and electronic signatures are trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It targets FDA-regulated records created, modified, or maintained electronically under predicate rules. The risk-based approach, clarified in FDA's 2003 guidance, narrows scope to relied-upon electronic records, exercising enforcement discretion on validation, audit trails, retention, and copies.

Key Components

**SubpartsGeneral provisions (§11.1-11.3), electronic records (§11.10-11.70 closed/open systems), signatures (§11.100-11.300).
Core controls: access limits, audit trails, operational/authority/device checks, signature manifestation/linking, training, policies.
~25 key requirements built on ALCOA+ principles.
**Compliance modelSelf-assessed via validation; enforced through FDA inspections.

Why Organizations Use It

Meets legal obligations for pharma, biotech, devices.
Mitigates data integrity risks, prevents warning letters.
Enables digital transformation, efficiency gains.
Enhances inspection readiness, stakeholder trust.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping, risk assessment, CSV (IQ/OQ/PQ), SOPs, training.
Applies to life sciences using e-records; all sizes.
No certification; focuses on inspection readiness.

Key Differences

Aspect	K-PIPA	FDA 21 CFR Part 11
Scope	Personal data protection, consent, rights, transfers	Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness, validation
Industry	All sectors handling Korean residents' data	Life sciences, pharma, medical devices
Nature	Mandatory national privacy regulation	Mandatory FDA regulation for electronic records
Testing	CPO audits, security assessments, no DPIAs	Risk-based system validation, IQ/OQ/PQ
Penalties	3% revenue fines, criminal up to 5 years	Warning letters, product holds, injunctions

Scope

K-PIPA

Personal data protection, consent, rights, transfers

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness, validation

Industry

K-PIPA

All sectors handling Korean residents' data

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Life sciences, pharma, medical devices

Nature

K-PIPA

Mandatory national privacy regulation

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Mandatory FDA regulation for electronic records

Testing

K-PIPA

CPO audits, security assessments, no DPIAs

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Risk-based system validation, IQ/OQ/PQ

Penalties

K-PIPA

3% revenue fines, criminal up to 5 years

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Warning letters, product holds, injunctions

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about K-PIPA and FDA 21 CFR Part 11

K-PIPA FAQ

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Beyond the Burden: How Intuitive Compliance Software Transforms Daily Workflows

Explore intuitive compliance software that automates workflows, simplifies onboarding, and reduces stress. Cut non-compliance costs 3x and boost efficiency for

ISO 27701 Implementation Roadmap: Step-by-Step Guide for Extending Your ISO 27001 ISMS to PIMS

Extend ISO 27001 ISMS to ISO 27701 PIMS with this step-by-step roadmap. Master role-specific controls, avoid pitfalls, meet certification evidence needs for pri

PDPA Cross-Border Transfer Rules Decoded: Singapore, Thailand, and Taiwan Mechanisms Compared with Practical Implementation Templates

Decode PDPA cross-border transfers for Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan. Statutory excerpts, approved mechanisms, SCC templates. Harmonize with GDPR, navigate exempt

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

100+ Standards & Regulations

AI-Powered Insights

Collaborative Assessments

Actionable Recommendations

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

ISO 55001 vs REACH

Compare ISO 55001 vs REACH: Unlock key differences in asset management standards & chemical regs. Align compliance, cut risks, maximize value in regulated sectors. Dive in now!

GLBA vs AS9120B

Discover GLBA vs AS9120B: Compare financial privacy/safeguards rules with aerospace distributor quality standards. Unlock compliance strategies, risks & implementation tips. Dive in now!

EN 1090 vs SAMA CSF

EN 1090 vs SAMA CSF: Compare EU steel/aluminium execution standards with Saudi financial cyber framework. Master classes, FPC certification & maturity models for compliance success. Dive in!

K-PIPA

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Quick Verdict

K-PIPA

Key Features

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

K-PIPA Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

K-PIPA FAQ

What is the primary objective of K-PIPA?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with K-PIPA?

Oes K-PIPA require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for K-PIPA be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with K-PIPA?

An K-PIPA be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing K-PIPA?

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ

What is the primary objective of FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

Does FDA 21 CFR Part 11 require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for FDA 21 CFR Part 11 be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

An FDA 21 CFR Part 11 be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Beyond the Burden: How Intuitive Compliance Software Transforms Daily Workflows

ISO 27701 Implementation Roadmap: Step-by-Step Guide for Extending Your ISO 27001 ISMS to PIMS

PDPA Cross-Border Transfer Rules Decoded: Singapore, Thailand, and Taiwan Mechanisms Compared with Practical Implementation Templates

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

ISO 55001 vs REACH

GLBA vs AS9120B

EN 1090 vs SAMA CSF