On one side, they say domestic smart factory deployment is rapidly expanding, while on the other side, people ask who they should contact to build a smart factory. These are contrasting statements that frequently emerge at smart factory-related discussion forums, which have come to the forefront as the core of the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. Why are such reactions occurring regarding smart factories, which refer to production systems where all manufacturing stages are automated and digitalized based on IoT and CPS (cyber-physical systems), and the entire value chain operates in real-time synchronization like a single factory? That reflects a significant temperature gap between the smart factory promotion projects that the government is enthusiastically pursuing and what manufacturing sites actually experience. Productivity improvement through smart factory policies requires first understanding the characteristics of domestic manufacturing. The photo shows Siemens' industrial platform MindSphere. According to overseas research institutions, 84% of more than 1,000 global companies with revenues exceeding 1 billion dollars as of 2015 are either in the process of building or planning to build smart factories. However, the situation in Korea is somewhat different. According to a survey conducted by the Korea Trade Association in June on visitor interest in smart factory construction at the '2017 Smart Factory Expo & Conference,' 92% of respondents expressed interest but hesitated to implement due to construction costs, connectivity with existing equipment, and employee capabilities. There were even cases where employees themselves opposed implementation due to concerns that smart factory adoption would lead to job losses. What manufacturing sites experience goes further. Many are unaware of where and how to find solutions tailored to their manufacturing processes. There are instances where companies hastily purchase MES (Manufacturing Execution Systems) costing hundreds of millions of won, fail in operation, and then repurchase. Companies that can even afford such equipment are fortunate. The majority of manufacturing companies across diverse industries struggle with construction costs, operational workforce, and construction methods. The diversity of Korea's manufacturing industry serves as both an advantage and a disadvantage. This means there are many mid-sized companies. Since the majority of businesses are relatively small in scale, they are cost-sensitive and operate various systems. There is a strong voice that the government must take the lead in standardization for this reason. The argument is that benchmark standards must first be established to integrate various systems across diverse industries. While it is important to immediately promote and deploy smart factories, there are calls to increase R&D investment in how to establish standardization systems. If focus is placed solely on the number of smart factory deployments, there is a risk of overlooking reality. In the past, there were projects to promote automation centered on manufacturing, but there is no guarantee that the smart factory project will not meet the same fate. Professor Hong Seung-ho from Yonsei University, who participated in a digital transformation strategy discussion forum utilizing smart factories, stated, "Smart factories should become technology for SMEs," and added, "Smart manufacturing should not simply be the concept of automation added to smart buildings. Once standardization is applied, it will ultimately be advantageous for SMEs." However, he noted that it will take some time for such benefits to reach SMEs. The same applies to the recently emerging employment issue. Certainly, in digitalized manufacturing processes, simple labor will be replaced, but workforce efficiency must be enhanced through job reallocation of regular employees. Germany, which triggered Industry 4.0, provides a solution through statistics showing that new jobs actually increased. Ultimately, whether it is smart factories, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or anything else, "people" remain at the center. As smart factory issues become increasingly heated recently, the temperature gap between policy and the field is becoming increasingly apparent. Ultimately, active interest among these stakeholders will significantly help narrow the gap.