This paper examines that the writing of Kim Myung-soon is a kind of response triggered by misunderstanding on her, especially literary responses, not explanations to reveal the truth. This is an endeavor to identify that her works were the appearance of a substantial problem in the period of establishing modern Korean Literature, and also the writing to reveal the abyss of the modern literature. Namely, Kim is obviously the subject of writing, not of woman’s writing. Kim’s works have been regarded as pieces of women’s writing, especially of Si n y eosu n g (New Woman). It was obvious that her works are the one of masterpieces that reflect the Si n y eosu n g ’s thought and life. Regarding generous opinions, her works mirrored her own life, which is proved that major characters of her works are actually herself. By using Ma n y a n cho , her pen name and Ta n sil , her childhood name, Kim, expressed herself as women suppressed in that time and designated her agonizing experience. However, in texts, her two names are not Kim’s other name but the kind of figures that lived their own speech. Their speech never integrated into the author’s language, namely Kim’s speech. These split speech does not indicate the circumstance that her one subject is divided. If anything, two or three or more individual subjects are assembled in her own subject. In other words, she speaks many words with only one mouse, in that, her speech is closes the plural speech drown concept in the idea of Blanchot. This means that she never occupies the place of ‘I’, as the absolute subject is the foundation of the modern literature, the ‘Literature of ‘I’. Furthermore, she disrupted the discourse of I by losing her own words. In this sense, her works are a kind of dark spot that have to be concealed to establish the literature of I.