The introduction of the textbook screening system has made a meaningful, albeit not considerable, contribution to debunking the idea of textbook as a ‘holy book.’ On the other hand, each textbook suggests a somewhat different history. This is, of course, partially a matter of perspective. However, if some of the differences are due to either miscomprehensions or mistakes, those differences should be corrected. This paper offers a review of the middle school history textbook ‘History, Vol I,’ whose result confirms, as regards the beginning of Korean history, the problem that ancient Korean history, in its entirety, is not presented in a balanced manner: issues such as the formation of the Korean nation-state, the question of legitimacy and succession, the stages of state development, the formation of the ancient states, and the ‘North-South States Period’ theory are neither adequately positioned nor organically discussed. Thus, further research and deeper discourse on this point are, now more than ever, needed. More specifically, to position the introduction of the ancient civilizations prior to the history of Gojoseon is a thoughtful gesture in that it allows students to situate the beginning of Korean history in the context of world history. Be that as it may, the long-winded explanation of them, however, distracts students from understanding Korean history in an organized way. In order for them to accurately understand the beginning of Korean history and the formation of the Korean nation-state, both the similarities and the differences between the world civilizations and Korean culture, along with its universal and distinct characteristics, should be mentioned instead of simply presenting the history of Gojoseon after the introduction of the ancient civilizations. With regard to the history of Gojoseon, the textbooks, at first, suggest that the formation of the Korean nation-state was completed during the period and then state that small states with an iron culture appeared after the fall of Gojoseon, which can be hardly construed as a consistent description. Several books are employing the ‘stratified chiefdom society’ and the ‘confederative states’ theory together. This is an inaccurate usage of the terms. As regards the ‘the Silla-led unification’ and the ‘North-South States Period’ theory, while ‘Unified Silla and Balhae’ is the most frequently used title in middle school, most of the high school textbooks designate it as ‘North-South States Period.’ In order for the history of Balhade to take strong root in Korean history, middle school textbooks, too, should use the title ‘North-South Period’ rather than ‘Unified Silla and Balhae.’ In the educational curriculum revised in 2007, the high school curriculum, in light of maintaining continuity with the middle school textbook History (Korean history section), has chosen early and modern history-centered ‘History’ (changed into Korean History). Yet, since it has not allocated any space to Korean cultural history, it has tried to fill out the blank with a history of Korea whose focus is disproportionally on the early and modern periods. The coverage of the pre-modern periods, thus, has become, at best, insufficient. Considering this absolute insufficiency in volume, there is little difference between the middle school textbook History, Vol I and the high school one Korean History. Curriculums and textbooks that correspond with the different stages of students’ historical understanding need to be developed. However good a blueprint might be, if it is not given enough time to be prepared, it can never be properly carried out. Thanks to the textbook screening system, the textbooks now in use have improved in many aspects. But they, at the same time, contain a number of shortcomings caused by some external obstacles. Frequent curriculum revisions, first and foremost, have been bringing about serious issues and as a result hampering the development of history education rather than leading it in the right direction. Hopefully, an elaborated curriculum textbook and a publishing system that reflect on the ideals of history education and embrace them, in not too distant future, will be firmly established.