明清史籍廣泛記載「明朝初年都督濮真征高麗殉國」之事跡，令人對此時期明朝與高麗宗藩關係的惡劣，產生深刻的印象。然而，就各種史籍記載的內容來考察，對此事件眾說紛紜，歧見雜陳，未有一致的看法，且官方史書更是不曾著錄，使人對此事件的真實性產生懷疑。明代史家朱國楨、談遷雖然已提出他們的質疑，但是在時空條件的局限下，並未能予以徹底的剖析訂正。筆者有鑑於此問題流傳甚廣，影響甚為深遠，乃廣蒐中韓相關史料加以論證，確定濮真事蹟是由濮英事蹟轉化而來，「濮真征高麗」的說法，只是在官方史料未公開情況下所產生的錯誤影射而已同時筆者也對明清野史的寫作過程略加考察，希望提醒大家不要為野史的錯誤記載所蒙蔽。

Ming-Ching historical books are written "The heroic deeds of Early Ming Du-Du (capital superintendent) Pu Cheng who invaded Korea to die for his country." We have a deep impression on the bad relationship of metropolitan state-vassal state between Ming dynasty and Korea. But we can examine the contents of several historical books. It is possible that the event was written by different methods, consequently the causes of a bad relationship were certainly not clear. We can't discover the same opinions in different historical books. The Ming dynasty historians, Chu Kauo-cheng and Tan Chian have suspected a bad relationship of the Ming metropolitan state with Korea the vassal state. I discovered that people discussed the question for a long time. The official historical documents, which do not treat facts as such, create crucial factors. I can be sure that the historical deed of Pu Cheng has come from the historical deed of Pu Inn. "Pu Cheng conquered Korea" was not written in the official history, so people committed an error in their thinking. At the same time I noticed in the writing process in the Ming-Ching unofficial history, their erroneous writing arised the question at present. We are loyal to the official history, and then the unofficial history can support us in many different ways of thinking, but it doesn't correspond to the truth.