This study examined how 16 Chinese transformational structures are generated using generative AI from the perspective of learners whose native language is Korean. To summarize: (1) In weak AI models, using the zero-shot input method, Baidu generated 13 transformed Chinese Sentences, and Papago generated 11 transformed Chinese Sentences. (2) In strong AI models, using the prompt input method, WRTN generated 12 transformed Chinese Sentences, and Yuanbao generated 11 transformed Chinese Sentences. The possible reason why weak AI showed better results than strong AI may be because the analysis target was simple sentences. Baidu and Papago AI are programs specialized in translation. Therefore, under the same conditions as the experiment, it can posited that weak AI is more specialized than strong AI. Thus, it may be sufficient to utilize weak AI in current Chinese writing education. Nevertheless, for this research be applicable to Chinese writing education, the following additional analyses are necessary: (1) This study targeted ‘simple sentences.’ If applied to ‘complex sentence’ writing education, an analysis of whether weak AI remains useful is necessary. (2) An analysis of how to conduct education using Artificial Intelligence is required.