▶ Your Answer :
Recently, The Korea government made new policy to decrease tax and invest money on construction of apartment to boost depressed economy. Different with government intentions, however, economy was not didn’t be boosted and citizens and companies are now complaining about recent financial crisis. Some people insist that new policy building more new housing (? 뭐죠?) by government was ineffective decision and government should rather spend their money to preserve historic or traditional building. In my opinion, I totally agree with this idea to spend money to preserve old architectures because of historical education and currently enough supply of housing.
Above all, we should keep our historical buildings for our children to learn about our history. (SUPPORTIVE SENTENCE 만들어주세요~) When people visit these historical places, they would we feel our ancestors’ touch and culture which is was main root of current trend/culture. From this, our children can try to have an interest on our history and patriotism. Therefore, government should put their finance on protecting/keeping original shape of traditional building to keep their original shape so these historical places could attract people to feel our culture. When I was young, I didn’t have thought at all about Korean history. One day Someday, I visited really old temple as by field trip and I realized that I should need to learn more about our history by this temple’s incredible historical background incredibly historical base. (incredible historical background 는 뭔지까지 서술해주시고요~ 표현을 이런 신기한 역사적 배경/내용들이 나의 호기심을 자극했다 등으로 표현하시는 것이 더 좋을 것 같아요~) From this good opportunity, I tried to read history books more than before and finally I could have wide knowledge about our history. Moreover, it is really helpful to explain our history to foreign client when I have business with foreigners. (문단의 흐름과는 큰 관련이 없어보입니다.) 전반적으로 글의 흐름이 잘 잡혀있지 않아서 논리적인 흐름으로 연결되지 못한 것 같습니다. 첫 문장과 supportive sentence 잘 잡으셔서 그 두 문장을 기본으로 expound 해보시길 바랍니다.
In addition, current housing supplied by supply by the government is actually enough to cover people’s demand. In fact, the supply is excessively over than demand according to government announcement. There are a lot of houses vacant but people don’t want to reside in there due to its low financial potentiality or geological disadvantage. Therefore, spending more money on building houses is wasting money. In the contrary, it could solve house problem if the government uses their money to develop historical places which are usually around non-popular houses. If the environment of these vacant houses becomes better, more people will be willing to live there(,) and it will solve which is able to so current housing problem. (공급이 충분한데 더 공급하기 위해 투자하는 것보다 historical places 를 보수공사 하는 것이 더 효과적이다 라는 분에서 급이 충분하다는 이야기는 언급되었지만 상대적으로 historical places 를 개발할 필요성이나 그 입장은 크게 강조되지 않은 듯 합니다.)
To conclude, I strongly support that government should use their financial resources to preserve historical building because these building will educate our offspring’s about history as well as current housing supply is enough to provide houses housing to middle class people. We should recognize that strong country is brought from it robust originality of its ancestors and the best way to make people learn this fact is to preserve our historical and traditional relic well.
내용면을 보충하고 improve 하기 위해 흐름을 살펴보시고 적절하게 자신의 주장과 근거가 사용되었는지도 판단해보시면 좋을 것 같습니다. 수고하셨습니다! |