This study aims to seek for Korean’s strategies and responses to expand in Myanmar, investigating on the internal and external policy of a new Myanmar government in 2011 and the changing possibilities of the major countries toward Myanmar. To do this, this study firstly analyzed the whole procedures and results of the general elections which were held on 7 November, 2010 after 20 years since 1990.
Secondly, it scrutinized views of the international society and response of the Burmese authorities. Then the Burmese economic reform achievement was surveyed focusing on privatization ahead for the general elections, and verified a diplomatic and economic exchange between Korea and Myanmar. Based on mentioned points, this paper finally aims to set up a new Korea's approach toward Myanmar.
This general elections were blamed in means of undemocratic, unfair, unfree and not inclusive for the people since approved the new constitution after the referendum in 2008. This claims were not changed when electoral situation had launched in March 2010.
Not only main political parties such as National League for Democracy (NLD) which is the winner in the 1990 general elections and Shan National League for Democracy (SNLD) did not register the political party to the Union Election Commission, but political prisoners including Aung San Suu Kyi and other 2,100 peoples cannot run for election candidate and vote for the parliament as well.
Therefore, the general elections could be estimated as being manipulated by the government authorities and as not a multi party democratic ones in terms of free and fair because the members of the Union Election Commission were filled with pro-government figures, electoral laws which were included the heavy prohibitions and regulations were severely undemocratic, and key incumbent members took part in the runs for elections as a party member of Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) which is pro-government political party came from Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA).
A new Myanmar government could be given legitimacy from the surrounding countries and some neutralized countries may seek for new approach to cooperate with Myanmar or make their own strategies to enlarge in Myanmar, though the result of the general elections were damaged internationally. Internally, a new government could clear military regime as has sustained by the military junta, but they would not keep their ruling strategies like depending on physical power and closed stance in the international society.
Even they would uphold a their ruling cause through economic development which could cause physical benefit and social welfare to the national peoples as doing away with the state owned economic structure, giving them more privatization of the state owned enterprises (SOEs).
In macro level, there is possibility that regime support countries and regime oppose countries sustain their original own policies toward Myanmar, but we have to see the changing possibilities of Myanmar's strategies. Some regime support countries would adopt more aggressive expanding strategies than present limited advances toward Myanmar, participating in excavation to energy sector and contesting regional hegemony in the Andaman Ocean and Bay of Bengal. However, It seems that Myanmar will seek rather multiple diplomatic approach than depending on the power countries what is a typical manner at present in order to enlarge her national interests through using geopolitical and geoeconomic values. On the way to do this, Myanmar wants to be a pivotal country keeping the balance of power in Southeast Asia.
For those reasons, it is time that Korea has to consider turing previous sideline approaches and needs to make a chance to preoccupy Myanmar which is to be an emerging market Myanmar. Furthermore, Korea could be an alternative power to check China and India, strengthening relation with ASEAN including Myanmar rather than to be an observer on the regional hegemony contest. It means that Korea can seek national interests with continuous overseas market expansion, improves external national images, makes advanced diplomacy which could create peaceful and harmonious regional orders as well as has a good chance to establish a status as a middle group country in Asia.

국문요약 

제1장 서 론  
1. 연구의 필요성과 목적 
2. 기존 논의의 검토 
3. 연구의 범위와 보고서의 구성 
가. 연구 범위와 방법 
나. 보고서의 구성 

제2장 미얀마 개관 
1. 자연 및 인문환경 
가. 자연환경 
나. 인문환경 
2. 최근 정치 및 경제동향 
가. 정치동향 
나. 경제동향 
3. 미얀마의 대외관계와 한국․미얀마 외교관계 
가. 미얀마 대외관계 
나. 한국․미얀마 관계 

제3장 미얀마 총선과 체제변동 
1. 총선 개요 
가. 역대 총선과 특징 
나. 신헌법 작성과 국민투표 
다. 2010년 총선 일정 
2. 총선 준비 과정과 선거운동 
가. 총선 관련 법령 공포 
나. 군부의 선거 참여 
다. NLD의 선택과 향후 행보 
라. 총선에 관한 국제사회의 반응과 미얀마의 대응 
3. 총선의 의의 및 향후 정국변화 전망 
가. 총선결과 분석 
나. 국제사회의 반응 
다. 향후 군부의 행보 및 신정부 구성 전망 

제4장 미얀마의 경제개혁과 한국․미얀마 경제교류 
1. 미얀마 경제의 특성 및 장단점 
가. 주요 경제정책 및 산업구조 
나. 미얀마 경제의 장점 
다. 미얀마 경제의 단점 
2. 국영기업의 민영화 추진 정도 및 전망 
가. 국영기업과 군부의 경제권 장악 
나. 국영기업의 민영화 추진 현황 
다. 민영화 평가와 향후 전망 
3. 한국․미얀마의 경제 관계 
가. 한국․미얀마 교역동향 
나. 산업별 투자동향 
다. 한국․미얀마 경제협의체 평가 

제5장 주요국의 대미얀마 정책 변화와 한국의 대응
1. 주요국의 대미얀마 정책 변화 가능성 점검 
2. 정권지지국가 
가. 중국 
나. 인도 
다. 아세안 및 아세안 회원국 
3. 정권반대국가 
가. 미국 
나. 유럽연합 
다. 일본 
4. 한국의 대응과 미얀마 진출 전략 점검 
가. 한국의 대응 전략 설정 
나. 진출 유망분야 및 전략 점검 

제6장 결 론  

참고문헌 

Executive Summary 

부록