Korea KCs for industrial robots: documents and a step-by-step guide

Understand the KCs route before commissioning work

Although often called ‘KCs certification’, the industrial-robot route is a mandatory self-declaration for products within scope. ‘Self’ describes who establishes conformity; it does not make filing optional. KCs is the mark, and KOSHA is the agency administering this route. Mandatory safety certification, voluntary S-mark certification, and inspection of a robot cell in use are separate processes.

This guide uses KOSHA’s September 2022 Self-declaration and Performance Testing Guide as its main technical reference, especially printed pages 6–12, 37–41 and 71–80. Filing requirements and KOSHA web guidance were cross-checked on 9 October 2026. Use the Korean rules and notices applicable when you file; the older handbook is a preparation aid. The handbook link below is a third-party mirror; the other sources are official Korean legal and agency pages.

Step 1: confirm scope, the applicant, and the model

KOSHA’s scope covers fixed robots with a manipulator having three or more axes, including Cartesian robots, that can be programmed and automatically controlled using a dedicated controller. The assembly includes actuators, the controller and teaching pendant, and communication interfaces. Do not classify a product from its marketing name alone.

A dedicated controller need not be a separate branded robot cabinet. The Ministry of Employment and Labor explains that a CPU, PC or PLC controlling the robot can qualify. Integrated control or the absence of a pendant does not by itself exclude an otherwise covered robot. A collaborative robot also needs a scope assessment; the ‘cobot’ label is not an exemption.

Identify the manufacturer or importer responsible for the filing. For an overseas supplier, agree with the Korean importer who supplies the technical evidence and who submits it before shipment. Check any claimed exemption separately: the handbook describes limited routes for research and development, manufacture for export, qualifying S-mark certification, and specified other approvals. A CE mark alone does not establish an exemption.

Define the robot type by its structure, appearance, function and performance. Record the arm and controller models, axis count, intended use and configuration. The handbook calls for a filing by type and uses axes as the industrial-robot capacity unit. Keep model identifiers consistent across the form, drawings, manual, test reports and nameplate.

Step 2: assemble the document pack

Article 120 requires the declaration form, a product description/manual, and evidence that the product meets the self-declaration safety criteria. The handbook explains the technical evidence in more detail. Organize the following documents for the exact model being declared:

• Declaration form. Use the current Form 48 (자율안전확인 신고서). Complete the applicant and product details, including the type/model and axis count. Attach an additional model list where appropriate under the filing guidance.
• Korean-language manual. Cover installation conditions, utilities, intended operation, teaching, testing, maintenance, control-system connections, load and motion limits, and emergency measures. Include the handbook’s instruction to install with regard to Korea’s occupational safety rules and the safety-inspection criteria where inspection applies. An English manual alone does not meet the handbook’s Korean-language instruction.
• Risk-assessment results. Address every applicable robot safety criterion and additional hazards of the actual product. Identify each hazard location, the protective measure, and the evidence of its effectiveness. Explain non-applicable items. The assessment and test/inspection results may be combined in one record.
• Test and inspection results. Include the electrical and electromagnetic-immunity evidence described in Step 3, plus functional checks supporting the risk assessment. Identify the tested robot/controller configuration and attach evidence of the external laboratory’s accreditation for the relevant test scope when using an outside laboratory.
• Drawings and safeguarding details. Supply an external or assembly drawing showing materials, dimensions and configuration, and documents showing where protective devices are installed and how they address the assessed hazards. Use circuit diagrams and device information to make the safety functions traceable. Include the relevant robot protective-device certificates and explosion-protection certificates where such equipment is used.
• Business identity information. Prepare the applicant’s registration details. Under the current Article 120(2), KOSHA checks the corporate register or sole proprietor’s business-registration certificate through administrative data sharing. A sole proprietor who does not consent to that check must attach the document. This is more specific than the older handbook’s copy-submission guidance.

Step 3: complete and document the safety checks

Use the industrial-robot result form on printed pages 71–80 of the handbook as a working checklist, alongside the applicable Hazardous Machinery Self-declaration Notice. It covers mechanical hazards, power loss and restoration, safety-related controls, protective stops, mode selection, teaching controls, motion limits, marking, instructions and electrical safety. A ticked checklist without supporting results leaves the compliance conclusion unsubstantiated.

• Electrical tests. The handbook’s robot checklist calls for protective-bonding continuity and insulation-resistance testing. Its item 36 permits omission of the withstand-voltage and residual-voltage tests. Record the applicable criteria, measured results and any justified omission against the governing requirements.
• Electromagnetic immunity. The handbook identifies KS C 9610-6-2 industrial-environment immunity testing as the accepted report basis. Check the report’s standard, test scope and tested configuration. It allows controller-type reports only where testing represents the most unfavorable conditions of the equipment in which the controller is installed. A generic EMC certificate or emissions-only report is not equivalent evidence.
• Functional safety and protective devices. Demonstrate the applicable stop, restart-prevention, interlock, mode-selection and teaching-control functions. Match protective-device certificates to the installed devices. For collaborative operation, assess the actual application and applicable robot/system requirements; do not infer that a collaborative arm makes the entire cell safe for unrestricted access.
• Who may perform the tests. The handbook accepts reports from appropriately accredited or designated laboratories within their recognized scope. It also permits the declarant’s own test results where the declarant has the relevant test and inspection equipment. Confirm acceptance and supporting evidence with KOSHA before relying on an in-house route, especially for EMC.

Step 4: submit the declaration to KOSHA

Contact the KOSHA regional office handling hazardous machinery for the applicant’s location, using the current agency directory rather than the handbook’s 2022 contact list. Confirm the filing channel, current forms and any model-specific questions. Submit Form 48 and the complete supporting pack through the accepted channel; Article 120 expressly permits electronic documents. Complete the filing before factory release or import.

Before submission, check that every report belongs to the declared configuration, the Korean manual matches the delivered product, drawings identify the safeguards, and signatures and applicant details are complete. Keep a dated copy of what was submitted and the receipt/reference number. These are practical document-control steps that make follow-up easier.

Step 5: resolve the review and obtain the certificate

The published sequence is product testing and conformity verification, declaration, then issue of the declaration certificate. Article 120(3) sets a 15-day period from receipt for KOSHA to issue Form 49, the 자율안전확인 신고증명서. Treat that as the administrative processing period, not a promise that engineering, testing, translation and corrections will fit into 15 days. Resolve deficiencies with the reviewing office before treating the process as complete.

The September 2022 guide states that there is no declaration filing fee. Budget separately for laboratory work, translation, engineering changes and any adviser you engage, and confirm current charges before ordering services. The certificate records the declaration; responsibility for conformity remains with the manufacturer or importer.

Step 6: apply the KCs mark and retain the evidence

After completing the declaration, apply the prescribed KCs mark using the official artwork and marking rules. The KOSHA corporate name or logo is not a substitute for the product mark. Check the robot’s separate identification requirements, including manufacturer details, model and serial number, manufacturing date, weight, supply specifications and load capacity.

Article 164(2) requires manufacturers and importers of self-declaration products to retain conformity evidence for two years. Keep the submitted file and certificate linked to the supplied configuration, and reassess changes to the robot, controller or safety functions for their effect on the declaration. Longer retention can be useful for product support; the two-year period is the legal minimum discussed here.

Step 7: check the installed robot cell separately

The robot’s KCs declaration does not complete the employer’s assessment of the installed cell. KOSHA’s separate safety-inspection scope concerns cells containing articulated robots with at least three rotary joints, with specific exclusions. This differs from the three-axis self-declaration definition. An inspection exclusion based on speed, motor power, reach or enclosure must not be reused as a blanket exemption from the robot’s KCs declaration.

Where periodic safety inspection applies, KOSHA lists the first inspection within three years after installation is completed and subsequent inspections every two years. Assess guarding, access, teaching, maintenance and safe integration before operation; that inspection timetable is not permission to operate an unsafe cell in the meantime. Record the installation date, inspection-scope decision and responsible workplace owner.

Can existing CE or overseas reports reduce the work?

Existing technical evidence can help, but its relevance must be demonstrated. The handbook provides a specific route for replacing risk-assessment and test results with certification documents issued by a foreign safety-certification body covered by a mutual-recognition agreement with the minister or certification agency. Confirm the current agreement, product scope and accepted documents with KOSHA. An ordinary CE declaration, ISO certificate or supplier brochure does not automatically meet those conditions.

A useful first action is to send the responsible KOSHA office a concise product specification, controller details, proposed applicant and list of existing reports. Use its response to settle scope and evidence gaps before booking further tests. The aim is a complete, model-specific declaration file that can be traced to the robot actually supplied.

Prepare your Korea robot compliance research with Regunow

Use Regunow to examine Korean regulatory sources, analyze your manuals and test reports, and organize document gaps for your team’s review before filing with KOSHA.