๐Ÿงช

Feasibility and Viability

Agent Progress
Built
Keywords
์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ / ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ / ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ / ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„
Lesson #
S
Done
Section
Advanced Vocabulary
๐Ÿงช
TL;DR ๐Ÿฆ„
  • ๐Ÿงช ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ means whether a plan can actually be carried out with available people, time, technology, money, and conditions. (feasibility)
  • โš–๏ธ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ means whether something is reasonable, valid, justified, or logically convincing. (validity / justification)
  • ๐Ÿ’ธ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ means whether the costs, benefits, efficiency, and financial logic make sense. (economic viability)
๐Ÿ”Š
๐ŸŽง Iru Helper Note โ€” Phrases like ์‚ฌ์—…์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค (to review the validity of a project) sound very formal, so try them in
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets
. Your ears deserve a feasibility study too. ๐ŸŽง
ย 

๐ŸŒˆ The Big Picture

Before a policy, project, business idea, or research plan begins, Korean texts often ask: โ€œCan we actually do this, and does it make sense?โ€ That is where ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (feasibility), ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ (validity / justification), and ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ (economic viability) appear. ๐Ÿงญ
These words overlap, but they are not the same. ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ checks practical conditions: staff, time, budget, law, technology, and capacity. ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ checks the reason or logic: whether the plan is justified and appropriate. ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ checks money logic: whether the expected benefit is worth the cost. ๐Ÿ’ฐ
A proposal can be logically valid but hard to execute. It can be technically possible but economically weak. It can be cheap but socially unjustified. Advanced Korean analysis gets sharper when you separate these evaluation lenses. ๐Ÿ”

๐ŸŽจ The Core Feasibility Family

  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ = feasibility; the possibility of actually carrying out a plan.
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ = validity / reasonableness / justification. It asks whether the plan or claim makes sense.
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ = economic viability; whether costs and benefits are reasonable.
  • ๊ฒ€ํ†  = review / examination. A formal word for checking something carefully.
  • ๋ถ„์„ = analysis. Used when examining data, causes, effects, or feasibility factors.
  • ํ‰๊ฐ€ = evaluation. Used when judging value, quality, effect, or performance.
  • ๋น„์šฉ ๋Œ€๋น„ ํšจ๊ณผ = cost-effectiveness. Literally โ€œeffect compared to cost.โ€
  • ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ = constraint factor. Something that limits execution.

๐Ÿ› ๏ธ How They Work in a Sentence

  • ์ •๋ถ€๋Š” ์ƒˆ ๊ตํ†ต ์ •์ฑ…์˜ ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. (The government is reviewing the feasibility of the new transportation policy.) ๐ŸšŒ
    • ๊ตํ†ต ์ •์ฑ… = transportation policy, ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค = to review, ์žˆ๋‹ค here shows an ongoing action.
  • ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์„ ๋†’์ด๋ ค๋ฉด ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•œ ์ž๋ฃŒ๊ฐ€ ํ•„์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค. (To increase the validity of the research results, sufficient data is necessary.) ๐Ÿ“š
    • ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ = research results, ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•œ ์ž๋ฃŒ = sufficient data, ํ•„์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค = to be necessary.
  • ์ด ์‚ฌ์—…์€ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์ด ๋‚ฎ์•„ ์žฅ๊ธฐ ์ถ”์ง„์ด ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค. (This project has low economic viability, so long-term implementation is difficult.) ๐Ÿ—๏ธ
    • ์‚ฌ์—… = project/business, ๋‚ฎ๋‹ค = to be low, ์žฅ๊ธฐ ์ถ”์ง„ = long-term implementation.

๐Ÿงฉ General Formation Rule

Evaluation vocabulary often forms compact noun phrases:
  • ์‹คํ–‰ (execution) + ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (possibility) โ†’ ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (feasibility)
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ (economy) + ์„ฑ (quality/characteristic) โ†’ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ (economic viability)
  • ํƒ€๋‹น (valid/reasonable) + ์„ฑ (quality/characteristic) โ†’ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ (validity)
  • ๋น„์šฉ (cost) + ํšจ๊ณผ (effect) โ†’ ๋น„์šฉ ํšจ๊ณผ (cost-effectiveness)
Helpful verb pairings:
  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค (to review feasibility)
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋‹ค (to evaluate validity)
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์„ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜๋‹ค (to analyze economic viability)
  • ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๋‹ค (to identify constraint factors)
  • ๋Œ€์•ˆ์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋‹ค (to compare alternatives)

๐Ÿ“š Cross-check note

Key vocabulary and formal usage were cross-checked against ๊ตญ๋ฆฝ๊ตญ์–ด์› / korean.go.kr and public Korean planning documents where ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์  ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ, ๊ฒฝ์ œ์  ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ, and ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„ appear in project-review contexts. โœ…

๐Ÿชž Synonym Alert

  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (feasibility) โ€” practical ability to carry out a plan.
  • ์‹คํ˜„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (realizability) โ€” whether something can become real; close to feasibility, often broader.
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ (validity / justification) โ€” reasonableness, logic, or appropriateness.
  • ์ ํ•ฉ์„ฑ (suitability / fit) โ€” whether something fits a purpose, condition, or standard.
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ (economic viability) โ€” money-side reasonableness, cost-benefit logic, or efficiency.

โš ๏ธ Pitfalls to Dodge

  • โŒ ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ = โ€œgood ideaโ€ โ†’ โœ… it means the plan can realistically be carried out.
  • โŒ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ = โ€œprofitableโ€ โ†’ โœ… it means reasonable or justified; profitability is closer to ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ.
  • โŒ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ = โ€œcheapโ€ โ†’ โœ… it means economically reasonable, not just low-cost.
  • โŒ ๊ฒ€ํ†  and ๋ถ„์„ are identical โ†’ โœ… ๊ฒ€ํ†  is review; ๋ถ„์„ is deeper examination of parts, causes, or data.
  • โŒ One positive factor proves feasibility โ†’ โœ… feasibility depends on multiple constraints: budget, technology, time, law, people, and risk.

You now have the vocabulary to judge whether a plan is brilliant, buildable, and not secretly a budget-eating dragon. Practical, logical, economical โ€” the project-review trifecta. ๐Ÿงช๐Ÿ’ธ
ย 

Try this exercise

Choose the best evaluation word for each sentence. Read the Korean first, decide whether the focus is feasibility, validity, economic viability, review, or constraint, then open the Answer toggle.
1. ์ „๋ฌธ๊ฐ€๋“ค์€ ์ƒˆ ๋„์‹œ ๊ณ„ํš์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ–ˆ๋‹ค.
Experts reviewed the feasibility of the new urban plan. ๐Ÿ™๏ธ
Answer
์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” The sentence asks whether the plan can actually be carried out.
2. ์ž๋ฃŒ๊ฐ€ ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜๋ฉด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๋ก ์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ์•ฝํ•ด์ง„๋‹ค.
If data is insufficient, the validity of the research conclusion weakens. ๐Ÿ“š
Answer
ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ€” The issue is whether the conclusion is justified and convincing.
3. ๋น„์šฉ์ด ํšจ๊ณผ๋ณด๋‹ค ํฌ๋ฉด ์‚ฌ์—…์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ๋‚ฎ๋‹ค๊ณ  ๋ณผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If the cost is greater than the effect, the projectโ€™s economic viability can be seen as low. ๐Ÿ’ธ
Answer
๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ โ€” This evaluates the cost-benefit side.
4. ๋ฒ•์  ์ œํ•œ์€ ์ •์ฑ… ์ถ”์ง„์˜ ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ์š”์ธ์ด๋‹ค.
Legal limits are an important constraint factor for policy implementation. โš–๏ธ
Answer
์ œ์•ฝ โ€” ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ means constraint factor.
5. ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ ๋Œ€์•ˆ์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•œ ๋’ค ์ตœ์ข… ๋ฐฉ์•ˆ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ–ˆ๋‹ค.
After comparing several alternatives, the final plan was reviewed. ๐Ÿงพ
Answer
๊ฒ€ํ†  โ€” ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค means to review carefully.
6. ๊ธฐ์ˆ  ์ธ๋ ฅ์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜๋ฉด ์‹คํ–‰ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ๋–จ์–ด์ง„๋‹ค.
If technical personnel are insufficient, feasibility decreases. ๐Ÿง‘โ€๐Ÿ’ป
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ is split here across the sentence.
7. ์ด ์ฃผ์žฅ์€ ๋…ผ๋ฆฌ์  ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ๊ฐ€ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ๋†’๋‹ค.
This argument has sufficient logical grounds, so its validity is high. ๐Ÿง 
Answer
ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ€” Logical grounds support ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ.
8. ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ ๋Œ€๋น„ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋”ฐ์ง€๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ๋ถ„์„์— ํ•ด๋‹นํ•œ๋‹ค.
Examining effect compared to budget belongs to economic analysis. ๐Ÿ“Š
Answer
๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ โ€” Budget-versus-effect logic is ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ ๋ถ„์„.
9. ํ˜„์žฅ ์กฐ๊ฑด์— ๋งž๋Š”์ง€ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์€ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์— ํฌํ•จ๋œ๋‹ค.
The process of checking whether it fits field conditions is included in the review stage. ๐Ÿ› ๏ธ
Answer
๊ฒ€ํ†  โ€” ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„ means the review stage.
10. ์œ„ํ—˜ ์š”์†Œ๋ฅผ ๋ฏธ๋ฆฌ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•ด์•ผ ๊ณ„ํš์˜ ์‹คํ˜„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ ๋†’์ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Risk factors must be identified in advance to improve the planโ€™s realizability. ๐Ÿšง
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” ์‹คํ˜„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ means realizability.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ†’ feasibility
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ†’ validity; reasonableness
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ โ†’ economic viability
  • ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ โ†’ constraint factor
  • ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to review
  • ๊ธฐ์ˆ  ์ธ๋ ฅ โ†’ technical personnel
  • ๋…ผ๋ฆฌ์  ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ โ†’ logical grounds
  • ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ ๋Œ€๋น„ ํšจ๊ณผ โ†’ effect compared to budget
  • ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„ โ†’ review stage
  • ์‹คํ˜„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ†’ realizability
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก Ask three questions: Can we do it? Does it make sense? Is it worth the cost?

๐Ÿš€
Want more reps? The Practice Hub below turns project-review vocabulary into clean analytical power. ๐Ÿงช
ย 
๐Ÿ“ฆ
๐ŸŽฏ Practice Hub โ€” Feasibility and Viability
ย 
Welcome to your feasibility-and-viability practice zone. ๐Ÿงช This set helps you separate ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ (feasibility), ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ (validity), ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ (economic viability), and ๊ฒ€ํ†  (review) so your Korean analysis sounds precise, not like a meeting slide pretending to be a plan.
ย 
๐Ÿ”Š Audio reminder: Use
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets
whenever long formal phrases need a listening check.
ย 
๐Ÿ“ Instructions: Complete each sentence with the best project-review word or phrase. Focus on whether the sentence tests practical execution, logical justification, cost-benefit logic, review process, or limiting conditions.
ย 

Exercise 1 โ€” Feasibility Checks ๐Ÿ› ๏ธ

A. ์ „๋ฌธ ์ธ๋ ฅ์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜๋ฉด ์‚ฌ์—…์˜ ์‹คํ–‰ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ๋‚ฎ์•„์ง„๋‹ค.
If specialized personnel are insufficient, the projectโ€™s feasibility decreases. ๐Ÿง‘โ€๐Ÿ’ผ
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ means feasibility in practical execution.
B. ๊ณ„ํš์€ ์ข‹์ง€๋งŒ ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ์ด ์—†์œผ๋ฉด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•˜๊ธฐ ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค.
The plan is good, but without budget, it is difficult to execute. ๐Ÿ’ฐ
Answer
์‹คํ–‰ โ€” The issue is carrying it out, not whether the idea sounds nice.
C. ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์  ํ•œ๊ณ„๋Š” ํ”„๋กœ์ ํŠธ ์ถ”์ง„์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ์š”์ธ์ด ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Technical limitations can be a constraint factor in project implementation. ๐Ÿงช
Answer
์ œ์•ฝ โ€” ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ limits feasibility.
D. ํ˜„์žฅ ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ๊ณ„ํš์˜ ์‹คํ˜„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ ํ™•์ธํ–ˆ๋‹ค.
Through field research, the planโ€™s realizability was confirmed. ๐Ÿ”Ž
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” ์‹คํ˜„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ means whether something can become real.
E. ์ธํ—ˆ๊ฐ€ ์ ˆ์ฐจ๊ฐ€ ๋ณต์žกํ•˜๋ฉด ์‹คํ–‰ ์ผ์ •์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If permit procedures are complex, the execution schedule may be delayed. ๐Ÿ•ฐ๏ธ
Answer
์ง€์—ฐ โ€” ์ง€์—ฐ๋˜๋‹ค means to be delayed.
F. ์‚ฌ์—… ์ถ”์ง„ ์ „์—๋Š” ํ•„์š”ํ•œ ์ž์›์„ ๋จผ์ € ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
Before project implementation, necessary resources must first be identified. ๐Ÿ“ฆ
Answer
ํŒŒ์•… โ€” ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๋‹ค means to identify or grasp.
G. ์‹œ๋ฒ” ์šด์˜์€ ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ ๋„์›€์ด ๋œ๋‹ค.
Pilot operation helps verify feasibility. ๐Ÿงช
Answer
๊ฒ€์ฆ โ€” ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋‹ค means to verify.
H. ์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ ์ธ๋ ฅ์ด ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•ด์•ผ ๊ณ„ํš์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Time and personnel must be sufficient for the plan to be carried out. โฑ๏ธ
Answer
์‹คํ–‰ โ€” ๊ณ„ํš์„ ์‹คํ–‰ํ•˜๋‹ค means to execute a plan.
I. ์ง€์—ญ ์ฃผ๋ฏผ์˜ ๋ฐ˜๋Œ€๋Š” ์ •์ฑ… ์‹คํ–‰์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋กœ ์ž‘์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Local residentsโ€™ opposition can act as an obstacle to policy execution. ๐Ÿ˜๏ธ
Answer
์žฅ์• ๋ฌผ โ€” An obstacle that blocks execution is ์žฅ์• ๋ฌผ.
J. ๊ตฌ์ฒด์  ์ผ์ •์ด ์—†์œผ๋ฉด ๊ณ„ํš์˜ ์‹คํ–‰๋ ฅ์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋œ๋‹ค.
Without a concrete schedule, the planโ€™s execution power weakens. ๐Ÿ“…
Answer
์•ฝํ™” โ€” ์•ฝํ™”๋˜๋‹ค means to weaken.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ์ „๋ฌธ ์ธ๋ ฅ โ†’ specialized personnel
  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ†’ feasibility
  • ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์  ํ•œ๊ณ„ โ†’ technical limitation
  • ์ œ์•ฝ ์š”์ธ โ†’ constraint factor
  • ํ˜„์žฅ ์กฐ์‚ฌ โ†’ field research
  • ์ง€์—ฐ๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to be delayed
  • ์ž์›์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to identify resources
  • ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to verify
  • ์žฅ์• ๋ฌผ โ†’ obstacle
  • ์•ฝํ™”๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to weaken
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก Feasibility is practical: people, money, time, technology, law, and risk all matter.

Exercise 2 โ€” Validity and Justification โš–๏ธ

A. ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ๊ฐ€ ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ์ฃผ์žฅ์€ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ์•ฝํ•˜๋‹ค.
An argument with insufficient grounds has weak validity. ๐Ÿง 
Answer
ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ€” A claim needs logical or evidential support to have validity.
B. ์ •์ฑ… ๋ชฉํ‘œ์™€ ์ˆ˜๋‹จ์ด ๋งž์ง€ ์•Š์œผ๋ฉด ์ •์ฑ…์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ๋–จ์–ด์ง„๋‹ค.
If policy goals and means do not match, the policyโ€™s suitability decreases. ๐Ÿงญ
Answer
์ ํ•ฉ โ€” ์ ํ•ฉ์„ฑ means suitability or fit.
C. ์กฐ์‚ฌ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์ด ๋ถ€์‹คํ•˜๋ฉด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ ์˜์‹ฌ๋ฐ›์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If the research method is poor, the validity of the research results may be questioned. ๐Ÿ”ฌ
Answer
ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ€” Research validity depends partly on method and data.
D. ์ƒˆ ๊ทœ์ œ๋Š” ๊ณต์ต์ด๋ผ๋Š” ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ€์ ธ์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
The new regulation must have justification based on public interest. ๐Ÿ›๏ธ
Answer
๊ทผ๊ฑฐ โ€” ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ means basis or grounds.
E. ํƒ€๋‹นํ•œ ๊ฒฐ์ •์€ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•œ ์ •๋ณด์™€ ํ•ฉ๋ฆฌ์  ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์— ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ํ•œ๋‹ค.
A valid decision is based on sufficient information and rational judgment. ๐Ÿงพ
Answer
ํŒ๋‹จ โ€” ํ•ฉ๋ฆฌ์  ํŒ๋‹จ means rational judgment.
F. ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ํ•ฉ์˜๊ฐ€ ์—†์œผ๋ฉด ์ œ๋„ ๋„์ž…์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ์•ฝํ•ด์งˆ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Without social agreement, the legitimacy of introducing the system may weaken. ๐Ÿค
Answer
์ •๋‹น โ€” ์ •๋‹น์„ฑ means legitimacy.
G. ๋Œ€์•ˆ์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋ ค๋ฉด ์žฅ๋‹จ์ ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
To evaluate the validity of an alternative, its pros and cons must be compared. โš–๏ธ
Answer
๋น„๊ต โ€” ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋‹ค means to compare.
H. ๋ช…ํ™•ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์ค€์ด ์—†์œผ๋ฉด ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ๋‚ฎ์•„์ง„๋‹ค.
Without clear criteria, the consistency of evaluation results decreases. ๐Ÿ“
Answer
์ผ๊ด€ โ€” ์ผ๊ด€์„ฑ means consistency.
I. ์ •์ฑ…์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์€ ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ํ•„์š”์™€๋„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋œ๋‹ค.
The validity of a policy is also connected to social need. ๐ŸŒ
Answer
์—ฐ๊ฒฐ โ€” ์—ฐ๊ฒฐ๋˜๋‹ค means to be connected.
J. ์ „์ œ๊ฐ€ ํ‹€๋ฆฌ๋ฉด ๊ฒฐ๋ก ์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ๋„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If the premise is wrong, the validity of the conclusion can also be damaged. ๐Ÿงฉ
Answer
ํ›ผ์† โ€” ํ›ผ์†๋˜๋‹ค means to be damaged or undermined.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ โ†’ grounds; basis
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ†’ validity; reasonableness
  • ์ ํ•ฉ์„ฑ โ†’ suitability; fit
  • ์กฐ์‚ฌ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ• โ†’ research method
  • ๊ณต์ต โ†’ public interest
  • ํ•ฉ๋ฆฌ์  ํŒ๋‹จ โ†’ rational judgment
  • ์ •๋‹น์„ฑ โ†’ legitimacy
  • ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to compare
  • ์ผ๊ด€์„ฑ โ†’ consistency
  • ํ›ผ์†๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to be undermined
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ asks whether the logic, grounds, and purpose hold up.

Exercise 3 โ€” Economic Viability and Cost Logic ๐Ÿ’ธ

A. ์ˆ˜์ต๋ณด๋‹ค ๋น„์šฉ์ด ํฌ๋ฉด ์‚ฌ์—…์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ๋‚ฎ๋‹ค.
If costs are greater than revenue, the projectโ€™s economic viability is low. ๐Ÿ“‰
Answer
๊ฒฝ์ œ โ€” ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ evaluates cost-benefit logic.
B. ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ ๋Œ€๋น„ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ๋†’์œผ๋ฉด ๋น„์šฉ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ์ข‹๋‹ค๊ณ  ๋ณผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If the effect compared to budget is high, cost-effectiveness can be viewed as good. ๐Ÿ“Š
Answer
ํšจ๊ณผ โ€” ๋น„์šฉ ํšจ๊ณผ means cost-effectiveness.
C. ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ ๋ถ„์„์—์„œ๋Š” ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋น„์šฉ๊ณผ ์œ ์ง€ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋ฅผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๋ณธ๋‹ค.
In economic viability analysis, initial costs and maintenance costs are examined together. ๐Ÿงฐ
Answer
๋น„์šฉ โ€” ์œ ์ง€ ๋น„์šฉ means maintenance cost.
D. ์‚ฌ์—…์˜ ํŽธ์ต์ด ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์œผ๋ฉด ํˆฌ์ž ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๊ฐ€ ๋‚ฎ์•„์ง„๋‹ค.
If project benefits are insufficient, investment value decreases. ๐Ÿ’ผ
Answer
๊ฐ€์น˜ โ€” ํˆฌ์ž ๊ฐ€์น˜ means investment value.
E. ๊ณต๊ณต ์‚ฌ์—…์€ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
Public projects should consider not only economic viability but also social value. ๐ŸŒฑ
Answer
๊ฐ€์น˜ โ€” Economic viability is not the only evaluation lens.
F. ๋น„์šฉ์„ ์ค„์—ฌ๋„ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์ด ํฌ๊ฒŒ ๋–จ์–ด์ง€๋ฉด ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋˜์ง€ ์•Š๋Š”๋‹ค.
Even if costs are reduced, economic viability does not improve if quality drops significantly. ๐Ÿงช
Answer
๊ฐœ์„  โ€” ๊ฐœ์„ ๋˜๋‹ค means to improve.
G. ์žฅ๊ธฐ ์šด์˜ ๋น„์šฉ์„ ๋ฌด์‹œํ•˜๋ฉด ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๊ฐ€ ์™œ๊ณก๋œ๋‹ค.
If long-term operating costs are ignored, the economic viability evaluation is distorted. ๐Ÿ—๏ธ
Answer
ํ‰๊ฐ€ โ€” ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ ํ‰๊ฐ€ means economic viability evaluation.
H. ๋Œ€์•ˆ๋ณ„ ๋น„์šฉ์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋ฉด ํšจ์œจ์ ์ธ ์„ ํƒ์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•˜๋‹ค.
Comparing costs by alternative makes efficient choice possible. ๐Ÿงพ
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ โ€” ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๋‹ค means to be possible.
I. ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์ด ๋†’์•„๋„ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ ํ”ผํ•ด๊ฐ€ ํฌ๋ฉด ์ถ”์ง„ ์—ฌ๋ถ€๋ฅผ ๋‹ค์‹œ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
Even if economic viability is high, if environmental damage is large, whether to proceed should be reviewed again. ๐ŸŒŠ
Answer
๊ฒ€ํ†  โ€” Economic logic alone does not end the review.
J. ํ•œ์ •๋œ ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ž์› ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ํŠนํžˆ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค.
With a limited budget, resource allocation is especially important. ๐Ÿ“ฆ
Answer
๋ฐฐ๋ถ„ โ€” ์ž์› ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„ means resource allocation.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ โ†’ economic viability
  • ์ˆ˜์ต โ†’ revenue; profit
  • ๋น„์šฉ ํšจ๊ณผ โ†’ cost-effectiveness
  • ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋น„์šฉ โ†’ initial cost
  • ์œ ์ง€ ๋น„์šฉ โ†’ maintenance cost
  • ํˆฌ์ž ๊ฐ€์น˜ โ†’ investment value
  • ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ๊ฐ€์น˜ โ†’ social value
  • ๊ฐœ์„ ๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to improve
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ ํ‰๊ฐ€ โ†’ economic viability evaluation
  • ์ž์› ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„ โ†’ resource allocation
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ is not โ€œcheapnessโ€; it is whether the economic logic is reasonable.

Exercise 4 โ€” Review Stages and Decision Process ๐Ÿ”

A. ์‚ฌ์—… ์ดˆ๊ธฐ์—๋Š” ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ๊ณผ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์„ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•œ๋‹ค.
In the early stage of a project, feasibility and economic viability are reviewed together. ๐Ÿ“
Answer
๊ฒ€ํ†  โ€” ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค is the broad review action.
B. ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ž๋ฃŒ ์ˆ˜์ง‘๊ณผ ์œ„ํ—˜ ๋ถ„์„์ด ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง„๋‹ค.
In the review stage, data collection and risk analysis take place. ๐Ÿ“‚
Answer
๋‹จ๊ณ„ โ€” ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„ means review stage.
C. ์ตœ์ข… ๊ฒฐ์ • ์ „์—๋Š” ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ ๋Œ€์•ˆ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
Before the final decision, several alternatives must be compared. โš–๏ธ
Answer
๋น„๊ต โ€” Alternative comparison is essential before decisions.
D. ์œ„ํ—˜ ์š”์ธ์„ ์ œ๋Œ€๋กœ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜๋ฉด ํŒ๋‹จ์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If risk factors are not properly identified, judgment may be distorted. ๐ŸŒ€
Answer
์™œ๊ณก โ€” ์™œ๊ณก๋˜๋‹ค means to be distorted.
E. ์‹œ๋ฒ” ์‚ฌ์—…์€ ๋ณธ๊ฒฉ ์ถ”์ง„ ์ „์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ๊ณผ์ •์ด๋‹ค.
A pilot project is a verification process before full-scale implementation. ๐Ÿงช
Answer
๊ฒ€์ฆ โ€” Pilot projects test whether assumptions hold.
F. ์ „๋ฌธ๊ฐ€ ์ž๋ฌธ์€ ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์„ ๋†’์ธ๋‹ค.
Expert consultation increases the reliability of review results. ๐Ÿ‘ฉโ€๐Ÿซ
Answer
์‹ ๋ขฐ โ€” ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ means reliability.
G. ์˜์‚ฌ ๊ฒฐ์ •์ž๋Š” ๋ถ„์„ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ์ถ”์ง„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋ฅผ ํŒ๋‹จํ•œ๋‹ค.
The decision-maker judges whether to proceed based on the analysis results. ๐Ÿšฆ
Answer
์—ฌ๋ถ€ โ€” ์ถ”์ง„ ์—ฌ๋ถ€ means whether to proceed.
H. ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ดํ•ด๊ด€๊ณ„์ž์˜ ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค.
During the review process, stakeholdersโ€™ opinions must be reflected. ๐Ÿ—ฃ๏ธ
Answer
๋ฐ˜์˜ โ€” ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•˜๋‹ค means to reflect opinions.
I. ์ž๋ฃŒ๊ฐ€ ๋ถˆ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•˜๋ฉด ์ถ”๊ฐ€ ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If data is insufficient, additional research may be requested. ๐Ÿ”Ž
Answer
์š”์ฒญ โ€” ์š”์ฒญํ•˜๋‹ค means to request.
J. ์ตœ์ข…์•ˆ์€ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ ๊ฒ€ํ† ๋ฅผ ๊ฑฐ์ณ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋œ๋‹ค.
The final plan is selected after feasibility/validity review. โœ…
Answer
์„ ์ • โ€” ์„ ์ •๋˜๋‹ค means to be selected.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to review
  • ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„ โ†’ review stage
  • ๋Œ€์•ˆ โ†’ alternative
  • ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to compare
  • ์œ„ํ—˜ ์š”์ธ โ†’ risk factor
  • ๊ฒ€์ฆ ๊ณผ์ • โ†’ verification process
  • ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ โ†’ reliability
  • ์ถ”์ง„ ์—ฌ๋ถ€ โ†’ whether to proceed
  • ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to reflect opinions
  • ์„ ์ •๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to be selected
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก ๊ฒ€ํ†  is the careful checkpoint before commitment.

Exercise 5 โ€” Mixed Mastery + Pitfall Patrol ๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ

A. ์ข‹์€ ์•„์ด๋””์–ด๋ผ๋„ ์ธ๋ ฅ๊ณผ ์˜ˆ์‚ฐ์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜๋ฉด ์‹คํ–‰ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ๋‚ฎ๋‹ค.
Even a good idea has low feasibility if personnel and budget are insufficient. ๐Ÿง‘โ€๐Ÿ’ผ
Answer
๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ€” โŒ good idea = feasible โ†’ โœ… feasibility needs practical resources.
B. ๋…ผ๋ฆฌ์  ๊ทผ๊ฑฐ๊ฐ€ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•œ์ง€๋Š” ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œ๋‹ค.
Whether logical grounds are sufficient is a matter of validity. ๐Ÿง 
Answer
ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ€” This is not money logic; it is justification and reasonableness.
C. ๋น„์šฉ๋ณด๋‹ค ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์ž‘์œผ๋ฉด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ๋‚ฎ๋‹ค๊ณ  ํŒ๋‹จํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If the effect is smaller than the cost, economic viability can be judged low. ๐Ÿ’ธ
Answer
๊ฒฝ์ œ โ€” ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ checks cost-benefit logic.
D. ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์‹ผ ๋Œ€์•ˆ์ด ํ•ญ์ƒ ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ๊ฒƒ์€ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.
The cheapest alternative is not always the one with high economic viability. ๐Ÿท๏ธ
Answer
๋†’์€ โ€” โŒ economic viability = cheap โ†’ โœ… quality, benefit, maintenance cost, and risk also matter.
E. ๊ฒ€ํ† ๋Š” ๋‹จ์ˆœ ํ™•์ธ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋” ์ฒด๊ณ„์ ์ธ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ ๊ณผ์ •์ด๋‹ค.
Review is a more systematic examination process than a simple check. ๐Ÿ”
Answer
๊ฒ€์‚ฌ โ€” This catches the nuance: ๊ฒ€ํ†  involves careful examination, not a quick glance.
F. ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ์ด ๋†’์•„๋„ ์‹คํ–‰ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜๋ฉด ์ถ”์ง„์ด ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
Even if validity is high, implementation may be difficult if execution conditions are insufficient. ๐Ÿšง
Answer
๊ณค๋ž€ โ€” A plan can be reasonable but still hard to execute.
G. ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์ด ์ข‹์•„๋„ ๊ณต์ต์„ ํ•ด์น˜๋ฉด ์ •์ฑ…์˜ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์„ฑ์ด ์•ฝํ•ด์ง„๋‹ค.
Even if economic viability is good, if it harms public interest, policy legitimacy weakens. ๐Ÿ›๏ธ
Answer
์ •๋‹น โ€” ์ •๋‹น์„ฑ is legitimacy, separate from profit.
H. ์œ„ํ—˜ ์š”์ธ์„ ๋ฌด์‹œํ•˜๋ฉด ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.
If risk factors are ignored, the feasibility evaluation may be distorted. ๐ŸŒ€
Answer
์™œ๊ณก โ€” Ignoring constraints distorts feasibility analysis.
I. ๊ฒ€ํ†  ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ๋Š” ๋Œ€์•ˆ ๋น„๊ต์™€ ์ž๋ฃŒ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ด ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค.
In the review stage, comparison of alternatives and data analysis are important. ๐Ÿ“Š
Answer
๋ถ„์„ โ€” ์ž๋ฃŒ ๋ถ„์„ means data analysis.
J. ์ข‹์€ ํŒ๋‹จ์€ ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ, ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ, ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ์„ ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ๏ผฟ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณธ๋‹ค.
Good judgment examines feasibility, validity, and economic viability comprehensively. ๐Ÿงญ
Answer
์ข…ํ•ฉ โ€” ์ข…ํ•ฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณด๋‹ค means to view comprehensively.
๐Ÿ“š
Vocabulary Box
  • ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ โ†’ feasibility
  • ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ โ†’ validity; justification
  • ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ โ†’ economic viability
  • ๋Œ€์•ˆ โ†’ alternative
  • ๊ฒ€ํ†  โ†’ review
  • ๊ณค๋ž€ํ•˜๋‹ค โ†’ to be difficult
  • ์ •๋‹น์„ฑ โ†’ legitimacy
  • ์™œ๊ณก๋˜๋‹ค โ†’ to be distorted
  • ์ž๋ฃŒ ๋ถ„์„ โ†’ data analysis
  • ์ข…ํ•ฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณด๋‹ค โ†’ to view comprehensively
Tip ๐Ÿ’ก The final test: a plan should be doable, justified, economically sensible, and socially defensible.
ย 
๐ŸŽ‰ Excellent work โ€” you can now evaluate plans like a calm review committee: ์‹คํ–‰ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ asks โ€œCan we do it?โ€, ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ asks โ€œDoes it make sense?โ€, and ๊ฒฝ์ œ์„ฑ asks โ€œIs the money logic sane?โ€ ๐Ÿงช๐Ÿ’ธ