{"id":31354,"date":"2026-02-01T12:48:17","date_gmt":"2026-02-01T03:48:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/?p=31354"},"modified":"2026-02-01T12:48:20","modified_gmt":"2026-02-01T03:48:20","slug":"bird-conservation-and-the-proposed-new-gyeonggi-international-airport-within-the-hwaseong-wetlands-flyway-network-site-public-seminar-hwaseong-january-29th","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/?p=31354","title":{"rendered":"Bird conservation and the proposed new Gyeonggi International Airport within the Hwaseong Wetlands Flyway Network Site: Public Seminar, Hwaseong, January 29th"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Dr Nial Moores, National Director, Birds Korea<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The proposed location of the Gyeonggi New International Airport, based on a masterplan released by Suwon City in 2020. The main area of proposed airport operation is shaded in white (with two alternative locations suggested for the main terminals shown in blue and red); the bright green line shows the boundary of the Hwaseong Wetlands Flyway Network Site<\/a> (EAAF 142), designated in 2018; and the blue shaded area shows the location of the Hwaseong Maehyangri Tidal Flat Wetlands Protected Area, designated in 2021, which at closest would lie within c. 2.5km of the runway.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

On January 29th, a 90-minute public seminar was organised by National Assembly Member Song Ok-Ju and her esteemed colleagues from the National Assembly and Hwaseong City Assembly. Held in the Hyangnam-Eup Office, Hwaseong City, the seminar was attended by up to150 people. Chaired by Professor Lee Woo-Shin, who encouraged Hwaseong City to do much more to promote the value of the importance of the city’s biodiversity to local residents, 20-minute presentations were given by Dr Lee Who-Seung from the Korea Environment Institute (a Senior Research Fellow in the Natural Environmental Division who is widely respected as the leading national expert on bird-strike) and by myself on behalf of Birds Korea, with the very welcome support of Professor Lee Jiwone. My presentation focused on the research conducted as part of the Hwaseong Wetlands project, a very productive collaboration<\/a> between Birds Korea, Hwaseong KFEM, the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership Secretariat and Hwaseong City, and on experience gathered as an expert witness in the court case that ruled against the Saemangeum New Airport<\/a> in September 2025. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

These two presentations were followed by several 7-minute statements from civil society representatives, including KFEM and a large citizen movement, and a lawyer who introduced some aspects of the Saemangeum New Airport legal case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Some of the participants of the January 29th meeting in Hwaseong City.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

As always, a pdf of the Birds Korea presentation is available on request to Birds Korea members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For those interested in the proposed conversion of a Flyway Network Site into an international airport, below follows the English-language and Korean-language version (translated by Professor Lee Jiwone) of a short opinion statement written for Birds Korea in December 2025 that was included in the Proceedings of the January 29th meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The proposed Gyeonggi International Airport<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr Nial Moores, National Director, Birds Korea \/ \uc0c8\uc640 \uc0dd\uba85\uc758 \ud130<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on extensive research conducted in Hwaseong, it can be concluded that the proposed Gyeonggi International Airport, if built within the Hwaong District of Hwaseong, would be (1) ecologically devastating; (2) pose an extremely high bird strike risk; and (3) might be in breach of legal statutes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. If built as proposed, the Gyeonggi International Airport would be constructed within the Hwaong District of Hwaseong. It would therefore be built within the Hwaseong Wetlands Flyway Network Site (EAAF 142), a Flyway Network Site (FNS) of 7,301 ha of rice-fields, reed wetlands, reclamation lake and tidal flat which was designated by Hwaseong City and the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership Secretariat in 2018. The designation of the FNS was made because of the wetland\u2019s outstanding national and international importance to waterbirds (Hwaseong Wetlands FNS 2018).  Monthly counts of birds conducted in the Hwaseong Wetlands FNS between late June 2020 and mid-June 2021 recorded: more than 150,000 waterbirds in total; \u201cinternationally important\u201d concentrations (as defined by the Ramsar Convention) of 1% or more of 25 populations of waterbird; and 16 globally threatened wetland species (Moores et al. 2021, Moores et al. 2022). The FNS while not designated as a Ramsar site, therefore clearly meets Ramsar criteria for the identification of internationally important wetlands (see: Ramsar 2025). This bird research was then used to support designation of part of the FNS as the Hwaseong Maehyangri Wetland Protected Area in the second half of 2021. Construction of the airport itself within the FNS would result in massive loss and degradation of habitats used by foraging geese and ducks and of Nationally Threatened Wetland Species (including e.g., Lutra lutra<\/em>, Kaloula borealis<\/em>, and Pelophylax chosenicus<\/em>). It would also impact the preferred nesting site of Nationally Threatened Little Tern Sternula albifrons<\/em>; and would lead to severe degradation of the largest remaining shorebird roost in Gyeonggi Province, used by one of the world\u2019s largest concentrations of the globally Endangered and Nationally Protected Far Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis<\/em>, the species selected as Hwaseong City\u2019s symbol bird. The majority of the shorebirds in the FNS, including Far Eastern Curlew, forage at low tide in the Hwaseong Maehyangri Wetland Protected Area and then roost along the eastern shoreline of the Hwaseong reclamation lake within the FNS at high tide (Moores et al. 2022). In the Gyeonggi International airport plan presented by Suwon City in October 2020, the runway is depicted as ending about 1km from this shorebird roost area. This eastern shoreline of the reclamation lake was also shown during repeated surveys to be the most important area for roosting geese (see Figure 2 in Moores et al. 2022). Negative impacts on roosting shorebirds and geese would be caused through a massive increase in noise levels, as well as through light and air pollution and also by the need of airport authorities to reduce substantially the attractiveness of this area to waterbirds through the airport\u2019s mandatory Wildlife Hazard Management Plan. With ongoing development at several other potential shorebird roost sites along this stretch of coast and in consideration of the poor conservation status of several of the affected species, it can be reasonably predicted that the impact of this development would be substantial at both the national population level and at the level of Flyway population for several species. This includes several species that have been designated as protected species in Korea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. If located as proposed, aircraft flying in and out of the Gyeonggi International Airport would be exposed to an exceptionally high risk of bird strike unless all waterbird habitats in the FNS were removed. The primary concern of guidance by the International Civilian Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is the reduction of risk to aircraft while minimizing environmental impacts. ICAO therefore provides clear guidance on the potential siting of airports.  For example, ICAO (1987) Section 5.5.8 states that, \u201cSites adjacent to wildlife reserves, lakes, rivers and coastal areas, refuse dumps and sewage outfalls, etc. may not be desirable because of the danger of aircraft collision with birds. This is of special importance where faster, larger aircraft are involved. The location of sites relative to the migratory patterns and routes of birds, especially large birds such as swans and geese also requires consideration\u201d; ICAO (2002) Section 2.5.8 states that, \u201cAn important consideration related to airport operational safety is the prevalence and habits of birds in the area and the associated risk of aircraft bird strikes. Bird hazards at proposed new airports can be minimized by careful selection of the site to avoid established bird migration routes and areas naturally attractive to birds \u2026\u201d; ICAO (2012) Section 7.3 states that, \u201cSurface water is often highly attractive to birds\u201d; and  Appendix 2 in ICAO (2002) (\u201cLand-use Guidelines for the Avoidance of Bird Hazards) lists \u201cbird sanctuaries\u201d as one of only three land-use types which are unsuitable within 8km of airport operations. As proposed, the Gyeonggi International Airport would be built in a coastal area, within a wetland, next to a lake with extensive surface water, within about 1km of an area used by very large concentrations of waterbirds, including more than 40,000 geese at peak and within 3km of the nationally protected Hwaseong Maehyangri Wetland Protected Area.  Furthermore, ICAO (2020) Section 3.3.2 states that, \u201cGenerally, heavier wildlife and greater flock size increases the probability of damaging an aircraft and impacting its flight performance. Flocking behaviour could include multiple impacts or increase the probability of a strike.\u201d Research in the FNS confirms that several heavier species of bird that show strong flocking behaviour fly to and from the Hwaseong Reclamation Lake in different directions at different times of the day, and at night during some tide states (see Figure 18 in Moores et al. 2021).  These species include several that have been identified as posing a bird strike risk in the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessments of e.g., the proposed Saemangeum New Airport (MLIT 2021) and the proposed Gadeokdo Airport in Busan (MLIT 2023). Peak day counts of these species in the FNS recorded by Moores et al. (2022) include 40,500 Tundra Bean Goose, 25,000 Greater White-fronted Goose, 17,510 Mallard, 6,600 Black-tailed Gull and 1,550 Great Cormorant.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. It is clear that construction of a major airport within an internationally important wetland and the resultant declines in nationally protected wetland species that would follow through construction and airport operation would undermine national and regional commitments to biodiversity conservation, including those relating to the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership and to the intergovernmental Ramsar Convention. More importantly, these conservation commitments are also mandated by domestic laws and by the cabinet-level approved Fifth National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2024-2028) (ROK 2023). In addition to the direct impacts of habitat loss at and near to the airport site, a Wildlife Hazard Management Program would have to be put in place, with the aim of reducing the bird strike risk by controlling wildlife up to 13km out from airport operations.  Throughout the FNS, severe measures would therefore need to be taken to reduce the attractiveness to birds of all habitats, including in the Hwaseong Maehyangri Wetland Protected Area. This would obviously have an adverse impact on a large number of legally protected species. In light of this, it is worth citing the court ruling in September 2025 on the proposed Saemangeum New Airport, with one reason for the court\u2019s decision to cancel the airport plan being that: \u201cmeasures to attempt to reduce the bird strike risk would inevitably lead to the destruction of habitats for numerous legally protected bird species residing in and around the project site. The more measures implemented to reduce the risk of bird strikes, the more they conflict with other regulations and environmental management laws that stipulate the protection of legally protected bird species\u201d (Division 7, Seoul Administrative Court 2025). In addition, the \u201cLand-use Guidelines for the Avoidance of Bird Hazards\u201d (ICAO 2002), were used by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport as the basis for ordinance 2017-601 (\u201cStandards for Reducing the Risk of Collision of Birds and Wildlife\u201d). This ordinance prohibits bird sanctuaries, hunting areas, and food waste treatment facilities within 8km of airports. As there are no \u201cbird sanctuaries\u201d in the ROK, this term has been applied in the ROK to designated \u201cbird habitats\u201d. As the intention of 2017-601 is the reduction of the bird strike risk, it is reasonable to define the Hwaseong Maehyangri Wetland Protected Area, a nationally protected wetland area that supports a large number of waterbirds, as a \u201cbird sanctuary\u201d.   This Wetland Protected Area would be only 3km from the airport runway. Finally, based on all of the above, it seems especially remarkable that this airport location is even being considered after the fatal bird strike in December 2025 at Muan International Airport, in an area with many fewer waterbirds than the FNS. This crash resulted in amendments being made to the Airport Facilities Act on August 26, 2025 (Law No. 21037) in order to reduce the bird strike risk. It seems genuinely unclear how this airport proposal could be considered compatible with this national effort to reduce the bird strike risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\ub098\uc77c \ubb34\uc5b4\uc2a4 \ubc15\uc0ac\/ \uc0c8\uc640 \uc0dd\uba85\uc758 \ud130 \ub300\ud45c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\ud654\uc131\uc5d0\uc11c\uc758 \uc9d1\uc911 \uc870\uc0ac\ub97c \ubc14\ud0d5\uc73c\ub85c \uc5bb\uc5b4\uc9c4 \uacb0\ub860\uc740, \uc81c\uc548\ub41c \uacbd\uae30 \uad6d\uc81c\uacf5\ud56d\uc774 \ud654\uc131 \ud654\uc639\uc9c0\uad6c \uc548\uc5d0 \uc9c0\uc5b4\uc9c4\ub2e4\uba74 (1) \uc0dd\ud0dc\uacc4\uc758 \ud30c\uad34\uac00 \uc9c4\ud589\ub418\uba70 (2) \ub9e4\uc6b0 \ub192\uc740 \uc870\ub958 \ucda9\ub3cc\uc758 \uc704\ud5d8\uc774 \uc788\uace0 (3) \ubc95\uc801\uc778 \ubb38\uc81c\ub97c \uc77c\uc73c\ud0ac \uc18c\uc9c0\uac00 \uc788\ub2e4\ub294 \uac83\uc785\ub2c8\ub2e4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. \uc81c\uc548\ub300\ub85c\ub77c\uba74 \uacbd\uae30\uad6d\uc81c\uacf5\ud56d\uc740 \ud654\uc131\uc2dc \ud654\uc639\uc9c0\uad6c \ub0b4\uc5d0 \uc704\uce58\ud558\uac8c \ub429\ub2c8\ub2e4. \ub530\ub77c\uc11c \uc774 \uacf5\ud56d\uc740 \ud654\uc131\uc2dc\uc640 \ub3d9\uc544\uc2dc\uc544-\ub300\uc591\uc8fc \ucca0\uc0c8\uc774\ub3d9\uacbd\ub85c \ud30c\ud2b8\ub108\uc2ed(EAAFP) \uc0ac\ubb34\uad6d\uc774 2018\ub144\uc5d0 \uc9c0\uc815\ud55c 7,301ha \uaddc\ubaa8\uc758 \ub17c, \uac08\ub300 \uc2b5\uc9c0, \uac04\ucc99\ud638 \ubc0f \uac2f\ubc8c\ub85c \uad6c\uc131\ub41c ‘\ud654\uc131 \uc2b5\uc9c0 \ucca0\uc0c8\uc774\ub3d9\uacbd\ub85c \ub124\ud2b8\uc6cc\ud06c \uc0ac\uc774\ud2b8(FNS, EAAF 142)’ \ub0b4\uc5d0 \uc9c0\uc5b4\uc9c0\uac8c \ub429\ub2c8\ub2e4. \uc774\uacf3\uc740 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub958\uc5d0 \uc788\uc5b4 \ud55c\uad6d \ub0b4\uc640 \uad6d\uc81c\uc801\uc73c\ub85c \ub9e4\uc6b0 \uc911\uc694\ud55c \uc2b5\uc9c0\uc774\uae30 \ub54c\ubb38\uc5d0 \ucca0\uc0c8\uc774\ub3d9\uacbd\ub85c \ub124\ud2b8\uc6cc\ud06c\uc0ac\uc774\ud2b8 (FNS)\ub85c \uc9c0\uc815\ub418\uc5c8\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4 (\ud654\uc131 \uc2b5\uc9c0 FNS 2018). 2020\ub144 6\uc6d4 \ub9d0\ubd80\ud130 2021\ub144 6\uc6d4 \uc911\uc21c\uae4c\uc9c0 \uc2e4\uc2dc\ub41c \uc870\ub958 \uc870\uc0ac \uacb0\uacfc, \ucd1d 15\ub9cc \ub9c8\ub9ac \uc774\uc0c1\uc758 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub958\uac00 \uae30\ub85d\ub418\uc5c8\uc73c\uace0, 25\uc885\uc758 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub958 \uac1c\uccb4\uad70\uc774 \ub78c\uc0ac\ub974 \ud611\uc57d \uae30\uc900 ‘\uad6d\uc81c\uc801\uc73c\ub85c \uc911\uc694\ud55c’ \uc218\uc900\uc778 \uc804 \uc138\uacc4 \uac1c\uccb4\uc218\uc758 1% \uc774\uc0c1 \uc11c\uc2dd\ud558\uace0 \uc788\uc73c\uba70 16\uc885\uc758 \uc138\uacc4\uc801\uc73c\ub85c \uc704\ud611\ubc1b\ub294 \uc2b5\uc9c0 \uc885\ub3c4 \ud655\uc778\ub418\uc5c8\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4(Moores \ub4f1, 2021, 2022). \u00a0\ud654\uc131 \uc2b5\uc9c0\ub294 \ube44\ub85d \ub78c\uc0ac\ub974 \uc0ac\uc774\ud2b8\ub85c \uacf5\uc2dd \uc9c0\uc815\ub418\uc9c0\ub294 \uc54a\uc558\uc73c\ub098, \uad6d\uc81c\uc801\uc73c\ub85c \uc911\uc694\ud55c \uc2b5\uc9c0\ub97c \uc2dd\ubcc4\ud558\ub294 \ub78c\uc0ac\ub974 \uae30\uc900\uc744 \uba85\ud655\ud788 \ucda9\uc871\ud569\ub2c8\ub2e4(\ub78c\uc0ac\ub974 2025 \ucc38\uc870). \uc774 \uc870\uc0ac \uacb0\uacfc\ub294 2021\ub144 \ud558\ubc18\uae30, \uc774 \ucca0\uc0c8\uc774\ub3d9\uacbd\ub85c \ub124\ud2b8\uc6cc\ud06c\uc0ac\uc774\ud2b8 (FNS) \uc77c\ubd80 \uad6c\uc5ed\uc744 ‘\ud654\uc131 \ub9e4\ud5a5\ub9ac \uac2f\ubc8c \uc2b5\uc9c0\ubcf4\ud638\uc9c0\uc5ed’\uc73c\ub85c \uc9c0\uc815\ud558\ub294 \uadfc\uac70\uac00 \ub418\uc5c8\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4. \uc774 \uad6c\uc5ed \ub0b4\uc5d0 \uacf5\ud56d\uc774 \uac74\uc124\ub41c\ub2e4\uba74 \uae30\ub7ec\uae30 \ubc0f \uc624\ub9ac\ub958\uc758 \uba39\uc774 \ud65c\ub3d9\uc9c0\uc640 \uad6d\uac00 \ubcf4\ud638 \uc2b5\uc9c0\uc885(\uc218\ub2ec, \ub9f9\uaf41\uc774, \uae08\uac1c\uad6c\ub9ac \ub4f1)\uc758 \uc11c\uc2dd\uc9c0\uac00 \ub300\uaddc\ubaa8\ub85c \ud30c\uad34\ub418\uace0 \ud6fc\uc190\ub420 \uac83\uc785\ub2c8\ub2e4. \ub610\ud55c \ud55c\uad6d \ub0b4\uc5d0\uc11c\uc758 \ud76c\uadc0\uc885\uc778 \uc1e0\uc81c\ube44\uac08\ub9e4\uae30\uc758 \uc8fc\uc694 \ubc88\uc2dd\uc9c0\uc5d0 \uc601\ud5a5\uc744 \ubbf8\uce58\uba70, \uacbd\uae30\ub3c4 \ub0b4 \ub9c8\uc9c0\ub9c9\uc73c\ub85c \ub0a8\uc740 \ucd5c\ub300 \ub3c4\uc694\u00b7\ubb3c\ub5bc\uc0c8 \ud734\uc2dd\uc9c0\uc774\uba70, \ud654\uc131\uc2dc\uc758 \uc0c1\uc9d5 \uc0c8\uc774\uc790 \uc138\uacc4\uc801 \uba78\uc885\uc704\uae30\uc885\uc778 \uc54c\ub77d\uaf2c\ub9ac\ub9c8\ub3c4\uc694\uac00 \uc804 \uc138\uacc4\uc5d0\uc11c \uac00\uc7a5 \ub9ce\uc774 \ubaa8\uc5ec\ub4dc\ub294 \uacf3 \uc911 \ud558\ub098\uc778 \uc774 \uc7a5\uc18c\uc5d0 \uc2ec\uac01\ud55c \ud6fc\uc190\uc744 \uac00\uc838\uc62c \uac83\uc785\ub2c8\ub2e4. \uc54c\ub77d\uaf2c\ub9ac\ub9c8\ub3c4\uc694\ub97c \ud3ec\ud568\ud55c \ucca0\uc0c8\uc774\ub3d9\uacbd\ub85c \ub124\ud2b8\uc6cc\ud06c\uc0ac\uc774\ud2b8 (FNS)\uc758 \ub300\ubd80\ubd84\uc758 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub4e4\uc740 \ud654\uc131 \ub9e4\ud5a5\ub9ac \uac2f\ubc8c \uc2b5\uc9c0\ubcf4\ud638\uad6c\uc5ed\uc5d0\uc11c \ubb3c\uc774 \ub0ae\uc744 \ub54c \uba39\uc774 \ud65c\ub3d9\uc744 \ud558\ub2e4\uac00 \ubb3c\uc774 \ub192\uc544\uc9c0\uba74 FNS\ub0b4\uc758 \ud654\uc131 \uac04\ucc99\ud638\ub85c \uc774\ub3d9\ud558\uc5ec \ud734\uc2dd\ud569\ub2c8\ub2e4. (Moores et al.2022). 2020\ub14410\uc6d4 \uc218\uc6d0\uc2dc\uac00 \uc81c\uc548\ud55c \uacbd\uae30 \uad6d\uc81c\uacf5\ud56d \uac74\uc124 \uacc4\ud68d\uc5d0 \ub530\ub974\uba74 \ud65c\uc8fc\ub85c\ub294 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub4e4\uc774 \uc26c\ub294 \uacf3\uc5d0\uc11c 1km\ub5a8\uc5b4\uc9c4 \uacf3\uc5d0 \uc9d3\ub294 \uac83\uc73c\ub85c \uc81c\uc548\ub418\uc5b4 \uc788\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4. \ud654\uc131 \ud638 \ub3d9\ud3b8 \uae30\uc2ad\uc740 \uae30\ub7ec\uae30\ub4e4\uc774 \ud734\uc2dd\ud558\ub294 \uac00\uc7a5 \uc911\uc694\ud55c \uc7a5\uc18c\ub77c\ub294 \uac83\uc774 \uc5ec\ub7ec \ubc88\uc758 \uc870\uc0ac\ub85c \ud655\uc778\ub41c \ubc14 \uc788\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4 (\ub3c4\ud310 2. Moores et al.2022). \uacf5\ud56d\uc774 \ub4e4\uc5b4\uc124 \uacbd\uc6b0\uc758 \uc18c\uc74c \uc218\uce58\uc758 \uc5c4\uccad\ub09c \uc99d\uac00\uc640 \ube5b \uacf5\ud574 \ubc0f \ub300\uae30 \uc624\uc5fc, \uadf8\ub9ac\uace0 \uacf5\ud56d \ub2f9\uad6d\uc774 \uc758\ubb34\uc801\uc73c\ub85c \uc2dc\ud589\ud574\uc57c \ud558\ub294 ‘\uc57c\uc0dd\ub3d9\ubb3c \uc704\ud5d8\uad00\ub9ac \uacc4\ud68d\u2019\uc744 \ud1b5\ud574 \uc774 \uc9c0\uc5ed\uc758 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub958 \uc720\uc778 \uc694\uc18c\ub97c \ub300\ud3ed \uac10\uc18c\uc2dc\ucf1c\uc57c\ub9cc \ud558\ub294 \uc0c1\ud669\uc740 \ubb3c\uc0c8\ub4e4\uacfc \uae30\ub7ec\uae30\uc758 \ud734\uc2dd \uc7a5\uc18c\uc5d0 \ubd80\uc815\uc801\uc778 \uc601\ud5a5\uc744 \ubbf8\uce60 \uac83\uc785\ub2c8\ub2e4. \uc774 \ud574\uc548\uc120\uc744 \ub530\ub77c \uc704\uce58\ud55c \ub2e4\ub978 \uc5ec\ub7ec \uc7a0\uc7ac\uc801 \ub3c4\uc694\u00b7\ubb3c\ub5bc\uc0c8 \ud734\uc2dd\uc9c0\ub4e4\uc5d0\uc11c\ub3c4 \uc774\ubbf8 \uac1c\ubc1c\uc774 \uc9c4\ud589 \uc911\uc778 \uc810\uacfc \uc601\ud5a5\uc744 \ubc1b\ub294 \uc5ec\ub7ec \uc885\uc758 \uc5f4\uc545\ud55c \ubcf4\uc804 \uc0c1\ud0dc\ub97c \uace0\ub824\ud560 \ub54c, \uc774 \uac1c\ubc1c\uc758 \uc601\ud5a5\uc740 \uc5ec\ub7ec \uc885\uc758 \ud55c\uad6d \ub0b4 \uac1c\uccb4\uad70\ubfd0\ub9cc \uc544\ub2c8\ub77c \ucca0\uc0c8 \uc774\ub3d9 \uacbd\ub85c \uc804\uccb4 \uac1c\uccb4\uad70 \uc218\uc900\uc5d0\uc11c\ub3c4 \uc0c1\ub2f9\ud560 \uac83\uc774\ub77c\ub294 \ud569\ub9ac\uc801 \uc608\uce21\uc774 \uac00\ub2a5\ud569\ub2c8\ub2e4. \uc5ec\uae30\uc5d0\ub294 \ud55c\uad6d\uc5d0\uc11c \ubcf4\ud638\uc885\uc73c\ub85c \uc9c0\uc815\ub41c \uc5ec\ub7ec \uc885\uc774 \ud3ec\ud568\ub429\ub2c8\ub2e4.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n