¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ / v.11, no.3, 2010³â, pp.72-79
LCC±â¹ýÀ» ÅëÇÑ ±³À°½Ã¼³¹°ÀÇ À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§ ºÐ¼®
( Variation Range for Maintenance Costs of Education Facilities Based on LCC Analysis )
±è¿ë¼ö;°­Çö¿í; Áß¾Ó´ëÇб³ °ÇÃàÇкÎ;Áß¾Ó´ëÇб³ ÀϹݴëÇпø °ÇÃàÇкÎ;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
º» ¿¬±¸´Â ±³À° ½Ã¼³¹°ÀÇ ºÎÀ§º°(°Ç¹°¿ÜºÎ, °Ç¹°³»ºÎ, Àü±â¼ÒÈ­¼³ºñ, ±Þ¼öÀ§»ý¼³ºñ, ³­¹æ±ÞÅÁ¼³ºñ) À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§ ºÐ¼®À» ¸ñÀûÀ¸·Î ¼öÇàµÇ¾ú´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ °æ±âµµ¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÑ 10³â ÀÌ»ó ¿î¿µµÇ°í ÀÖ´Â ±³À°½Ã¼³¹° 3°÷À» »ç·Ê´ë»óÀ¸·Î ¼±Á¤ÇÑ ÈÄ º¸¼öÀ̷¿¡ µû¸¥ À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ ÁöÃâ ³»¿ªÀ» Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ·¸°Ô Á¶»çµÈ ½ÇÇà À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ¿Í LCC ±â¹ýÀ» ÅëÇØ ºÐ¼®µÈ ÃßÁ¤ À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñÀÇ ºñ±³¸¦ ÅëÇØ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§¸¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñÀÇ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§ ºÐ¼®Àº È®·üÀû ±â¹ýÀÎ ¸óÅ×Ä«¸¦·Î ½Ã¹Ä·¹À̼ÇÀ» Ȱ¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. »ó±â¿Í °°Àº ¸ñÀû°ú ¹æ¹ý¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ºÐ¼®µÈ °á·ÐÀ» ¿ä¾àÇÏ¸é ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. ù°, »ç·Ê 3°÷ÀÇ ºÎÀ§º° Æò±Õ ½ÇÇà À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ ºÐ¼® °á°ú ÃÑ¾× 1,317¹é¸¸¿ø ´ëºñ °Ç¹°¿ÜºÎ 19%, °Ç¹°³»ºÎ 28%, Àü±â¼ÒÈ­¼³ºñ 22%, ±Þ¼öÀ§»ý¼³ºñ 18%, ³­¹æ±ÞÅÁ¼³ºñ 13%·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù. µÑ°, »ç·Ê 3°÷ÀÇ ºÎÀ§º° Æò±Õ ÃßÁ¤ À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ ºÐ¼® °á°ú ÃÑ¾× 1,920¹é¸¸¿ø ´ëºñ °Ç¹°¿ÜºÎ 20%, °Ç¹°³»ºÎ 25%, Àü±â¼ÒÈ­¼³ºñ 22%, ±Þ¼öÀ§»ý¼³ºñ 20%, ³­¹æ±ÞÅÁ¼³ºñ 13%·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù. ¼Â°, »ç·Ê 3°÷ÀÇ ºÎÀ§º° ½ÇÇà À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ Æò±Õ°ú ÃßÁ¤ À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ Æò±Õ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§ ºÐ¼® °á°ú Æò±Õ 1,619¹é¸¸¿ø, ÃÖ¼Ò 1,409¹é¸¸¿ø, ÃÖ´ë 1,813¹é¸¸¿øÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù.
The purpose of this study is to analysis variation of range estimation for maintenance costs of education facilities based on LCC. The adapted research method selected three education facilities in Gyeonggi-Do region. On the basis of actual maintenance costs and analyzed estimation maintenance costs are compared for analyzing standard deviation and coefficient of variation. The research of this study are as follows: 1) The average actual maintenance costs for 1,317million won and each part of average ratio exterior 19%, interior 28%, electricity & fire fighting 22%, water supply & healthy 18%, heating & water supply 13%. 2)The average analysis maintenance costs for 1,920million won and each part of average ratio exterior 20%, interior 25%, electricity & fire fighting 22%, water supply & healthy 20%, heating &water supply 13%.. 3) The analysis variation of ranges for average costs 1,619million won for minimum costs 1,409million, maximum costs 1,813million won.
 
Ű¿öµå
±³À°½Ã¼³¹°;ºÎÀ§º° À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ;À¯Áö°ü¸®ºñ º¯µ¿¹üÀ§;¸óÅ×Ä«¸¦·Î ½Ã¹Ä·¹À̼Ç;Education facilities;Maintenance costs;Variation of range;Monte Carlo Simulation;
 
Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ³í¹®Áý / v.11, no.3, 2010³â, pp.72-79
Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
ISSN : 2005-6095
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO201027463260019)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿