No efforts have ever been made to define the characteristics of the Korean educational philosophy with regard to those of China or Japan. This absence of efforts sometimes are liable to produce a belief that the Korean educational philosophy lacks any independent character, and at the same time, it is similar as that of China and Japan. The writer presupposed that this would be a false belief. Then, the writer, in an effort to clarify the characteristics of the Korean educational philosophy has made a comparative study of the educational philosophies of the three nations. Above all, the writer has thus investigated the given premise chiefly with the “central ideals of human formation,” i.e. a viewpoint of educational values. The result clearly shows that, in the case of the Korean educational philosophy, the central ideal of human formation is the idea of "Hahn" (한 : 韓) as from “Hanunim”(하느님) and “Mutt.”(멋) In the case of the Chinese, “Bup, Do, and Ihn;” (法ㆍ道ㆍ仁) and in the case of the Japanese, “Wabi, Sabi, and Iki.”(わびㆍさびㆍいき) These central ideals of human formation, however, have gone through the process of historical development, respectively, and each one of them has to be chosen to denote the central ideal more concretely than before. Hence, we have the “Mutt” (멋) of Korea, “Ihn” (仁) of China, and “Iki” (いき) of Japan. These terminologies of “Mutt,” “Ihn,” and “Iki” are the ultimate expression of what each of the three peoples regard to be the most valuable objective as to be held as the central ideal of human formation. In other words, each of them ultimately aims an ideal state of harmony with substance (essence) and expression (elegance). In this respect, the three of them may be said to have no distinction at all. However, the shades of meaning or the nuance of the three particular expressions, i.e. “Mutt,” “Ihn,” and “Iki” suggest essential distinctions coming from the distinctive factors in their national hisories and cultural backgrounds. Thus, the “Mutt” is characterized with its aesthetic character, “Ihn” with its practicability, and “Iki” with its vivacity. These distinctions may be further proved and clarified by comparing national characters of these three peoples, which the writer intends to do later in an another article.