This study reconceptualizes heritage interpretation not as a service for tourist convenience, but as an instrument of public cultural policy, and examines the possibilities and limitations of applying Easy Korean from a cultural rights and accessibility perspective. Using qualitative document analysis, it reviews government policy documents, heritage interpretation materials, and reference materials on the current application of Easy Korean across three dimensions: 1. policy goals and the functional status of interpretation, 2. the institutional design of linguistic accessibility, and 3. the scope of beneficiaries and recognition of cultural rights. The findings show that while upper-level laws declare the right to enjoy culture, they do not define interpretation as an independent policy concept; likewise, implementation guidelines only advocate using easy terms as a general principle without providing concrete standards for language difficulty, a systematic multilingual framework, or procedures for comprehension testing. In addition, multilingual interpretation remains largely limited to a Korean–English bilingual structure. Easy Korean has not been institutionally introduced into the field of heritage interpretation, and foreigners and non-native Korean speakers are not explicitly included as policy beneficiaries. On the basis of these findings, this study proposes four policy implications: 1. redefining interpretation as an independent policy instrument, 2. developing language-level standards for interpretation texts, 3. expanding multilingual and Easy Korean systems, and 4. institutionalizing comprehension-testing procedures.
최사라 et al. (Wed,) studied this question.