Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, and Hungary, Visegrad Four, are considered some of the most successful countries in translating their economic and political systems from communist to capitalist ones. They have successfully adopted both liberal democracies and functioning market economies, also enjoying a rapid growth of both large-scale and small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs). While the former has been led by foreign firms, the latter has been based on innovative ideas. By doing so, they are gradually able to catch up with those of most of western European countries in terms of their business size, skills, and contribution, all of which also in turn contributes to their overall economic development. As a result,  all of the four countries became the members of the OECD (Czechia 1995, Poland and Hungary 1996, Slovakia 2010, and Estonia 2010), and the European Union member sates (by the EU’s 2004 eastern enlargement).
   The overarching strategies for these countries’ economic development, i.e., the former central and east European countries(CEECs), are related to the establishment and consolidation of their economic infrastructure first funded by the EU and then later on by the foreign direct investments. Yet, in the process of their economic development, there are also some unwanted side effects observed: the first is that they are too dependent on the EU markets with the latter becoming the main outlets for their exports; the second is that since their economic performances are pro-cyclical of the international economy, they also became very vulnerable to external shocks, if and when they occur. Thus when the sub-prime mortgage crisis hit the globe hard, and the sovereign debt crisis ensued and engulfed the entire Europe, for example, these countries also economically and politically suffered a lot, although their growing interconnectedness with the external economies once functioned as a boost for their economic growth.
   Having experienced such economic turmoils, these countries began to think that their past strategies of economic development should be refurbished, and in particular in order to prevent any forms of future economic crisis, their focus should not necessarily be on the existing large-scale state-owned smokestack companies. It should be on the small-and-medium sized enterprises, which might provide more flexibility and innovation, thereby allowing them to tap into growing niche markets, as all of this would eventually invigorate their economic growth. Thus the CEECs began to commit themselves to expanding their private sectors, promoting innovative entrepreneurship, and providing relevant financial aids, tax breaks, and consulting services so that their start-ups can grow to the extent that they are truly and internationally competitive.
   The geo-economic advantages most of these countries, the relatively cheap forces, and as integral part of the EU market make them as attractive markets for foreign investment and trade. It is these specific and combined reasons that Korea’s car and electronic companies were also attracted, and led to invest heavily in these markets. Yet, the large-scale investment, for example, by Samsung electronics and Hyundai Motor Co., soon became slowed down, even making the trade volume between South Korea and CEECs languished. And an argument for an alternative routes of trade and investment to facilitate further growth is getting further legitimate over time.
   Given the decreasing volume of trade and investment from Korea, but with the growing share of job opportunities and the amount of values added by the growth of small-and-medium sized companies, SMEs arguably are the future focus of investment and trade.
   While CEECs are now becoming a new market for large-scale investment and export partners, there nonetheless exist some issues to be addressed, such as how to cope with increasing competition and the structural difficulty in securing local cooperation. But given the calculation that securing this highly lucrative market is important, the Korean SMEs should now be vigilant of the problems likely to be encountered. The first barrier is how to address the language barriers, and the second one, and equally importantly, is how to secure the fundamental local information necessary to start their business in the region. So, understanding the economic situation of these countries, the economic and legal status relating to the business activities of the SMEs, and the relevant legal and administrative barriers seems to be prerequisite.
   With all this in mind, this research aims to identify, dissect, and examine the macro-economic conditions of these five targe countries, with particular reference to the economic status of their SMEs, the relevant legal and administrative environments both hampering and boosting their growth, and the conditions of the labour and business markets that would also affect their business activities. By doing so, it also aims to facilitate the export and investment of the Korean SMEs in these markets, believing that all of this information would eventually help their business activities in the region.
   The next chapter, Chapter Two, investigates the overall economic environment of the five target countries, examining the extent to which their SMEs have been able to contribute to the employment growth, the overall economic growth of the country, the production and export shares, and by doing so, it also attempts to demonstrate that they are the one that would lead their economic growth in the future.
   Chapter Three delves into the legal and administrative environments, focusing on the support program for the growth of SMEs, such as relevant government policies, and tax breaks, and so on. Despite a variation in terms of the support programs, there is a commonality: the EU’s Small Business Act(SBA), for example, has been equally applied, along with the individual-level of support. While the EU funds are not directly granted to individual SMEs, the fact that any companies, be foreign or domestic, working there are nevertheless able to benefit from these support funds seems to be noteworthy.
   Chapter Four deals with the labor and business environments. While CEECs provide cheap labor forces, they also have some structural problems, such as an increase of labor costs, the aging of their labor forces, and the increasing outflow of their skill workers into the western Europe. All of these would make the target countries as a future market less attractive, and providing an accurate assessment of these market for the future advancement of the Korean SMEs is therefore of utmost importance.
   Chapter Five suggests that replacing the decreasing roles of large-scale companies, the increasing commitments and innovative approaches of SMEs should be highlighted. And to facilitate the business of Korean SMEs in the markets, the chapter also suggests areas of cooperation, by taking a careful consideration of  the current conditions of local markets, their labour-market conditions and the relevant government policy for SMEs.
   Chapter Six concludes that instead of maintaining the extant unilateral and one-dimensional approach emphasizing internationalization and globalization of SMEs, all the necessary information, such as macro-economic conditions, SME policy, existing incentives, business environments, has to be acquired in prior for a successful future business.