World-class zoos have been recognized proponents of both animal welfare and wildlife conservation. The Korean zoos are in controversy over its existence, citing poor role performance. As one of the efforts to protect animals’ welfare and enhance wildlife conservation, leading zoos have been accredited through the inspections and evaluations. To improve the quality of Korean zoos, an accreditation standard that fits for Korean environment needs to be set. Out of various zoo accreditation standards around the world, we compared each category of all five publicly available accreditation standards; the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in the United States(AZA), Canada's Accredited Zoos and Aquarium(CAZA), European Association of Zoos and Aquaria(EAZA), Zoological Association of America(ZAA), and the Pan-African Association of Zoos and Aquariums(PAAZA). Based on the analysis result, we established 10 essential categories that were finally approved by the Focus group interview; animal welfare and care and management, veterinary care, conservation, education and interpretation, governing authority, staff, finance, physical facilities, safety and security, and master & strategy plan. This minimum zoo accreditation standards would enlighten the path to improve animal welfare and wildlife conservation of Korean local zoos.

We performed the quantitative analysis using MATLAB for slice thickness, spatial resolution, and low contrast resolution with the 50 received images which have suitable judgement by scanning AAPM phantom using GE, PHILIPS, SIEMENS, and TOSHIBA. Slice thickness and spatial resolution were measured by using full width at half maximum(below FWHM). Spatial resolution was confirmed that FWHM interval more than 1.0 mm size. Low contrast resolution was measured that how close by using Roundness Index(below RI) until 6.4 mm size. The spatial resolution 9 images and low contrast resolution 10 images which have disapproved judgement were also had the quantitative analysis. The statistic analysis was judged to have statistically significant differences when p-value is less than 0.05 through SPSS statistics 19.0 and T-test (paired t-test). For slice thickness 5 mm, the average qualitative evaluation group shows 4.98 mm and quantitative evaluation group shows 5.02. For slice thickness 10 mm, the average qualitative evaluation group shows 9.98 mm and quantitative evaluation group shows 9.86. No significant differences (p=0.07, p=0.06) with 5 mm and 10 mm. It confirmed the interval for all FWHM until 1.75, 1.50, 1.25, 1.00 mm as approved images on spatial resolution ,and the average distance was 0.102 mm and the minimum distance 0.054 mm. For disapproved images, all interval was not showed under 1.00 mm. For low contrast resolution, spproved image’s RI value shows average 0.81 and minimum 0.77. The disapproved image’s RI average shows 0.70. Statiscally significant differences were presented (all p<0.05) following hole size.