The purpose of this study is to mate a basic foundation for the discourse of Koreanness of contemporary Korean landscape architecture by way of searching the conceptual definitions of Koreanness through analysis of Koreanness discourses. The results are that discourses of Koreanness are to be classified in aesthetics type, spatial-temporal type, and cultural type. Aesthetics type is understood as style in terms of formal and design representation planning principles of spatial composition and immanence in terms of philosophy. Spatial-temporal type is understood as contemporaneity. This is classified as the concept of connoting of tradition, and separating and keeping a distance from tradition. Cultural type is prescribed as cultural identity. This is classified as unity, generality and individuality. The intension of Koreanness of these types is represented as an aspect changing and shifting from one regulation to another regulation. First, in the concerns of substantial archetypes like Korean original form, decorative element, spatial composition aesthetic perception and philosophy, Koreanness shifts to the point of view of contemporaniety which is created and defined in history. Second, Koreanness as contemporaniety shows a trend of shifting the point of view which is to be found through the reconsideration on modem history and modernism. Third, Koreanness defined as cultural identity shows a trend to emphasize the differences in other cultures and includes all the modem cultural agents. The number of views understood as individuality and denial are small but provide important points. Programmatic definition of Koreanness is not suitable. This basic study uses a stipulative or operational definition of Koreanness in many ways such as spatial and regional identity. Koreanness study for Korean contemporary landscape architecture requires a systematic understanding of modernity and colonization relating to identity. Also, it is needed to elaborate on the discourse to divide the meaning of a concept of identity.