在過去的四年裡，南韓是東亞國家當中，除了中國大陸之外，經濟表現最為亮眼的國家，但是就在七年之前，南韓卻是亞洲金融危機受害最深的國家之一，南韓政府在求助無門的情況之下，向國際貨幣基金尋求經濟援助。為何南韓經濟能夠在短短七年當中，從金融危機的泥沼中脫胎換骨，並在東亞國家中表顯相當亮麗的經濟成長呢？這是本文主要的研究動機。南韓是從1987年開始進入政治民主化的階段，為何同樣是民選總統的金泳三在1993年至1998年執政期間卻無法達成經濟改革的目標，而金大中卻反而能夠做到？這是本文所要探討的第一個議題；而從1993年至今有將近十年的時間，南韓的政經體制是否有明顯的改變，而這種改變對於南韓政府、大企業與銀行之間的關係會產生何種影響呢？這是本文所要探討的第二個議題。本文嘗試從政府、大企業與銀行之間的互動關係來分析南韓政治經濟體制的轉變。

In this past four years, South Korea's economic performance has been the most impressive among the Asian countries outside Mainland China. However, only eight years age, South Korea underwent financial crisis and pleaded IMF for aid. The goal of this article is to explore why Kim Dae Jung's reform policy succeeded and why Kim Young Sam's failed? We argue that since Kim Dae Jung became the president of South Korea in February 1998, two policy agenda were proposed. On the one hand, he drew aid from International Monetary Fund to reform the country's economic structure. On the other hand, he went beyond traditional bureaucracy and established an independent organization to carry out political reform. We conclude that the primary reasons of Kim Dae June's success are as follow. First, he did not go through traditional bureaucratic channels. Second, he established a new monitoring system. As a result, Kim's reforms fundamentally reshaped South Korea's political and economic institutions established by Park Chung Hee. We believe Kim's reforms are of great importance in South Korea's impressive economic growth.