Existing studies on RIA focus mainly on the system and operation of regulatory impact analysis. Therefore, there is a lack of empirical research on how actual cost-benefit analysis in RIA is conducted. In order to overcome these limitations, this study attempted to empirically examine the status of cost-benefit analysis in the regulatory impact analysis. To this end, the current status of the cost-benefit analysis in the regulatory impact analysis was analyzed in this study, focusing on 876 regulatory impact analyzes made in 2019. We have reviewed how much quantitative analysis is actually conducted, what are the measured values of cost and benefit, whether the target of analysis is sufficiently considered when measuring cost benefit, and whether various impact assessments are conducted. According to the analysis of the cost-benefit analysis in the regulatory impact analysis, most of them are based on qualitative analysis, there are significant deviations in the measured value of benefits rather than the cost, and the net cost of the regulatory impact is represented above zero in many cases. In addition, little indirect costs were considered, and government enforcement costs were rarely considered, and the impact on various groups was not properly considered. In order for the regulatory impact analysis to have a more positive impact on the establishment of high-quality regulations, these limitations in cost-benefit analysis need to be supplemented.