This study aims to analyze the characteristics of Ahn Junghyo`s self-translation of his own novel, Silver Stallion, first published in Korean in 1990, and translated by the author himself and published by Soho Press in New York in 1990. Silver Stallion has been considered one of the most successful Korean novels ever translated into another language in book markets abroad. The commercial success of the novel in fact can substantiate and exemplify the successful translation of the work. However, a wide range of transformations and manipulations reflected in the translation of the novel not only problematizes but also attempts to subvert the traditional perspective of ``faithfulness`` in translation evaluation. Also these changes and transformations indicate the Ahn`s own intention to rewrite the novel for a new kind of readers of different language background. While the Korean text approaches the theme of the novel with the shared understanding of Korean cultural and historical backgrounds, the author-translator intentionally makes changes to the point of view of the novel in the English translation while making the author-translator`s own intention of disclosing the hidden but destructive aspects of the atrocities of the war more explicit and aggressive in the translation. This intention is clearly reflected in Ahn`s more negative, sometimes distorted descriptions of the roles of UN soldiers, claimed to be ``saviors`` in the translation with stronger anti-war and anti-US point of view. This manipulation demonstrates that the author-translator has intended to simplify and clarify his message in the translation which was much more indirectly insinuated in the Korean text, for a new kind of readers who might lack an accurate understanding of the historical and cultural circumstances regarding the Korean War which has been only known to many Western readers as the great sacrifice of Western troops saving helpless Korean people from the communist threat. In this sense, despite a significant level of transformations and manipulations in the translation, the traditional criteria of ``faithfulness`` can be no longer applied to this English translation because ``self-translation`` leaves no room for readers and critics to criticize any kind of change, deletion, and manipulation on the ground that the translator might have misunderstood or missed the author`s intention. This dilemma rather makes possible of a different perspective of ``faithfulness`` in translation, and demonstrates that ``self-translation`` can transcend the traditional dimension of translation of approaching the original meaning, and become a part of ``continuing writing process`` by the same author, potentially making the translation a more refined and better version of the original text.