The ultimate goal of this paper is to show that Korean binding does not back up predicate-based binding theories. We provide six arguments that do not entertain predicate-based binding theories. First, Korean anaphors cannot be divided into local anaphors and non-local anaphors. Second, the Korean SE anaphor caki ‘self’ is associated with its antecedent by the speaker’s intention, whereas the Korean SE anaphor casin ‘self’ is associated with its antecedent by reference inheritance. Third, the Korean SE anaphors caki ‘self’ and casin ‘self’ behave like SELF anaphors since they are used as a logophor. Fourth, with respect to a QP, local caki ‘self’ functions as a SE anaphor, whereas non-local caki ‘self’ functions as a SELF anaphor. On the other hand, with respect to a QP, local and non-local casin ‘self’ functions as a SELF anaphor. Fifth, the Korean SE anaphors caki ‘self’ and casin ‘self’ indicate the absence of the TSC and SSC effect in Korean. Sixth, predicate-based binding theories are silent about two occurrences of caki ‘self’ and casin ‘self’ in the sentence.