The Korean environmental impact assessment(EIA) system, and explored ways to improve it as a more efficient and viable institution relevant to the demand of our time and conditions in study. The first problem this study identified is found in the fact that the party to write up the assessment report is itself the business operator or the one who is planning to work out the business plan. This structure translates into placing an order with an agent for EIA report. The reporting job may br subcontracted to the agent at a cost far below the rate specified in the ‘Standard for Estimate of Agency Fee for Environmental Impact Assessment.’ This practice also causes the vicious circle of producing a report that is written to justify the project or business in question or it leads to rough-and ready and poor documentation to minimize the time required. Second, in order to achieve the goal of the plan or business, which is the target of EIA, the local residents tend to ve regarded as an obstacle. This means elimination of the local people from participating in the EIA or their opinion being frequently ignored. This is the seed of distrust and hostility that sometimes provoke disagreements or fierce conflicts. The first proposal to improve these problem is to improve the factors that cause poor documentation of the assessment report as well as improve the understanding of the EIA system. This study proposes the following measures for improvement. The agency cost for EIA should be paid by the business operator or a third party that can ensure faithful implementation of the payment. A system should be established to verify transparent estimation of the agency cost. In order to enhance the professional quality of EIA agents, there should be implementation of qualification test for industrial engineer of related engineers in addition to the current EIA Qualification Test. The second proposal for improvement is to improve the citizen participation process by instituting a legal framework to make clear the purpose of the briefing session for local residents, which is held as a procedure of EIA, and to ensure more positive publicity during the stage of listening to the opinion of the local community. For a smooth and rational communication process, a moderator and a communicator of opinion, as is the case in a public hearing, could be instituted to clearly get the purpose of the briefing session across to the residents and to help to carry out the explanation and Q & A sessions according to the categories of the opinion of the residents. At present, the notification of the public inspection of the draft of the assessment report and briefing session for the residents is made on the newspaper and internet network. But some people have difficulty with access to this method of announcement. A higher participation rate could be secured if a legal provision is added to specify putting up placards in specific places such as the entrance to the place for the briefing session for residents or the building of administrative agencies of the area concerned.