The key word in this presentation is Genfukei. It’s Japanese word. We often recall many experiences from our childhood and talk about them with someone. These experiences can include landscapes, places, experiences of play, and interactions with other people in our hometowns. We would like to approach such experience using the term “Genfukei” (original-scape). We can define Genfukei (original-scape) as those memorable landscapes that consist of our experiences of the past about actual places, spaces, landscapes that strongly remain in our memories. The purpose of this study was to focus on the shared Genfukei of members of a local community and examine place-identity. Therefore the first question we must ask is how can we better understand the Genfukei of a regional community, and the second question is what kind of things can we describe as the Genfukei of a regional community. In the current research, I attempt to conceptualize and define the structure of Genfukei through qualitative analysis research methods in order to explain how it forms and what is common among individuals of a particular group. Method: Field interviews were conducted on Jeju Island, located in the southern extremity of South Korea. Four groups of 4 to 6 adults participated, and the participants in each group had been in touch with each other for years. How can we better understand the shared Genfukei of a regional community? The concept of participation type of individual members during the group narrative was used to better understand the groups’ Genfukei. These types can be categorized into the following four fixed types of narrative participation. Actual narrative data were analyzed to obtain 4 types of narrative participation. New topic introduction type: First, a new topic is indicated as a personal experience. We could see that there were many uses of “I” as a subject in this context. Elaborate explanation type: then, the next speaker makes an addition to the previous comment and widens the range of topic of the first speaker. We could see that there were many occasions where the subject of the contextual situation was “I also” and “we.” In these cases an expression of similar opinion or agreement was made, flowed by the connection of explanation from one’s own personal experience. Receptive reaction type: In this type, participants show a reaction to the offered topic, and they explain and give a deeper significance to the topic. They confirm the topic through repeating certain words mentioned throughout the narrative. Acceptive questioning type: In this type, participants ask a question to the speaker and other participants. There are many questions asked in order to form a better understanding of the topic or in order to facilitate the discussion of the same topic further. Discussion: I would also like to stress the importance of narrative. In the case of personal narrative, one can relate the past and the present in the form of “In the past I was ..., so now I am ...” But in group narrative, the subject of the story changes from “I was ...” to “I was ALSO ...,” to “at that time WE were ....” Finally, these shared experiences, expressed by the “shared we,” are used as a basis for evaluating the present. I feel that it is very important that such participants talk and share experiences with each other. Through this, during the talking, personal and meaningful stories of places and landscapes of the “shared we” are created. This is not just talking to discover some common elements or some unique idea by a knowledgeable person. It is a chance to talk with one another about experiences with common spaces, places, and landscapes, and in the process create a story that can then be shared with newcomers and younger generations. In other words, it is a chance to share a regional identity that inhabitants feel is their own “Genfukei”