1. CONTENTS (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES I research economically and systematically appropriate viewpoint and practical principle as comparing and analyzing the similarity and difference between the thoughts of Henry George and Jung Yakyoung. Henry George asserted a free transaction and land single tax to break through progress, poverty, and periodic recession according as economical impropriety in his book “Progress and Poverty”; on the other hand, Jung Yakyoung asserted Yeojeonje and Jeongjeonje. (2) RESEARCH METHOD I study Jung Yakyoung’s thought asserted Yeojeonje and Jeongjeonje and explore Henry George’s idea focused on Land Value Taxation. I proceed the study primarily focused on “Yeoyudangjeonseo” by analysis of literature to achieve my research goal. (3) RESEARCH FINDINGS The common point between the ideas of Jung Yakyoung and Henry George is a joint ownership to solve injustice and unequal distribution of wealth, which clearly come out in the present culture. Therefore, the similarity of both reformation proposals is to resolve an unequal difference between the poor and the rich; on the other hand, the difference is Jung Yakyoung based on the theory that all the land belong to king and Henry George based on the theory of Christianity and natural law. 2. RESULTS Both Henry George and Jung Yakyoung suggested ideal models about land study, however, they have different opinions about a value evaluation about which systematic structure is good or bad. I compare the thoughts of Henry George and Jung Yakyoung to overcome different opinions and concrete a realistic land policy. Land issue have divergent interests being in gear with a social, economical, and political triangle structure. If a paradigm is suggested in a diverse viewpoint to give a consideration the land could not possessed on the same plan as a general thing and take into account the peculiarity of goods and the vice of land private possession, it could invite the public concept of land ownership adapted in capitalism as the people aware the land could not be possessed absolutely and exclusively.