,
etc.) - Translate naturally. - Use appropriate Korean terminology for crypto/tech terms (e.g., DeFi, V3, oracles, etc.) – but we can keep English terms where common, or use Korean equivalents. For example, "governance" -> "거버넌스", "proposal" -> "제안", "market" -> "시장", "deposits" -> "예치금", "debt" -> "부채", "revenue" -> "수익", "operational costs" -> "운영 비용", "oracles" -> "오라클", "monitoring" -> "모니터링", "layer-2" -> "레이어 2", "L1" -> "L1", "ARFC" (Aave Request for Comment) – we might keep as ARFC or explain, but it's a governance stage. We'll keep as ARFC. "Snapshot vote" -> "스냅샷 투표", "AIP" -> "AIP" (Aave Improvement Proposal) – keep as AIP. "Pendle Principal Tokens" – keep as Pendle Principal Tokens or translate? Probably keep as is. We'll translate the title: "Aave Governance Reviews Proposal to Shrink Six Low-Volume Markets" -> "Aave 거버넌스, 거래량 낮은 6개 시장 축소 제안 검토" or similar. But we need to be accurate: "shrink" means to reduce or wind down. The article says "wind down six underperforming V3 markets" so "축소" or "정리" might be better. Let's do: "Aave 거버넌스, 저유동성 6개 시장 정리 제안 검토" – but "low-volume" could be "거래량이 낮은" but here it's about adoption, so "저활용" or "저유동성" is fine. I'll go with "Aave 거버넌스, 저유동성 6개 시장 축소 제안 검토" – but "축소" means reduce, but the proposal is to wind down, so "정리" (cleanup) might be better. The article title says "Shrink" so "축소" is okay. But the content says "wind down" which is "철수" or "정리". I'll use "정리" for wind down. So title: "Aave 거버넌스, 저유동성 6개 시장 정리 제안 검토" – but "저유동성" is low liquidity, but the article says "low-volume" meaning low trading volume, but actually it's about low adoption. So maybe "활용도가 낮은" or "거래량이 적은". I'll use "거래량이 낮은" but that's not exactly. Actually, the title says "Low-Volume Markets" – so "저거래량 시장" but that's not common. I'll use "저활용 시장" (low-utilization market) – but the article says "underperforming" and "low-adoption". I'll go with "저활용 6개 시장" – but to be safe, I'll use "거래량이 낮은" but that's not accurate because it's about deposits and debt. I think "저활용" is fine. Let's see: The meta description says "low-adoption V3 markets" – so "채택률이 낮은" or "활용도가 낮은". I'll use "활용도가 낮은" for the title. I'll translate title as: "Aave 거버넌스, 활용도 낮은 6개 시장 정리 제안 검토" – that's good. Now content: We need to translate the entire article into Korean, preserving HTML tags. I'll go paragraph by paragraph. First paragraph: "Aave's governance is weighing a proposal to wind down six underperforming V3 markets and offboard dozens of low-use reserves. The move, still in early discussion, targets deployments on Sonic, Scroll, zkSync, Metis, Soneium, and Aptos — chains where activity has failed to cover basic operational costs." Translation: "Aave 거버넌스는 성과가 저조한 6개 V3 시장을 정리하고 수십 개의 저활용 예비 자산을 오프보드하는 제안을 검토 중이다. 아직 초기 논의 단계인 이 움직임은 Sonic, Scroll, zkSync, Metis, Soneium, Aptos의 배포를 대상으로 하며, 이들 체인에서는 활동이 기본 운영 비용을 충당하지 못하고 있다." Note: "offboard" means to remove from the platform, so "오프보드" is a common term in crypto, or we can say "제외" but I'll keep "오프보드" as it's used. "reserves" – in Aave context, it's the assets supplied, so "예비 자산" or "유동성 자산" – but often "reserve" is "리저브" but in Korean DeFi, they use "예치 자산" or "자산" – but I'll use "예비 자산" or simply "자산". Actually, "low-use reserves" means assets that are not being used much, so "저활용 자산" is fine. I'll use "저활용 예비 자산" but maybe just "저활용 자산". I'll go with "저활용 자산" for simplicity. Second paragraph: "The proposal, submitted by risk analysis firm LlamaRisk, argues that maintaining small, low-adoption markets carries operational risk and cost that outweigh any benefit. These six markets collectively hold $98.1 million in deposits and $15.6 million in debt — less than 1% of Aave's total deposits. Yet they generated under $5,000 per quarter, not enough to pay for oracles and monitoring." Translation: "리스크 분석 회사 LlamaRisk가 제출한 이 제안은 규모가 작고 채택률이 낮은 시장을 유지하는 것이 이익보다 운영 리스크와 비용이 더 크다고 주장한다. 이 6개 시장은 총 9,810만 달러의 예치금과 1,560만 달러의 부채를 보유하고 있으며, 이는 Aave 전체 예치금의 1% 미만이다. 그러나 분기당 수익은 5,000달러 미만으로 오라클과 모니터링 비용을 충당하기에 부족하다." Third paragraph: "LlamaRisk's rationale is straightforward: Aave is one of DeFi's most important lending protocols, and resources should focus on larger, more productive markets. The proposal also includes offboarding 50 low-use reserves and 21 matured Pendle Principal Tokens across the broader Aave ecosystem." Translation: "LlamaRisk의 논리는 간단하다. Aave는 DeFi에서 가장 중요한 대출 프로토콜 중 하나이며, 자원은 더 크고 생산적인 시장에 집중되어야 한다는 것이다. 이 제안에는 또한 더 넓은 Aave 생태계 전반에 걸쳐 50개의 저활용 예비 자산과 21개의 만기된 Pendle Principal 토큰을 오프보드하는 것도 포함된다." Fourth paragraph: "The affected chains are all part of Aave's V3 expansion into layer-2 networks and alternative L1s. Sonic, Scroll, zkSync, Metis, Soneium, and Aptos each host a V3 market that never gained meaningful traction. Combined, they represent a tiny slice of Aave's $15 billion-plus deposit base." Translation: "영향을 받는 체인들은 모두 Aave V3의 레이어 2 네트워크 및 대체 L1 확장의 일부이다. Sonic, Scroll, zkSync, Metis, Soneium, Aptos는 각각 의미 있는 성과를 거두지 못한 V3 시장을 호스팅하고 있다. 이들을 합치면 Aave의 150억 달러 이상의 예치금 기반에서 아주 작은 부분을 차지한다." Fifth paragraph: "Debt on these markets is just $15.6 million, and the revenue they generate is negligible. LlamaRisk's analysis suggests the cost of maintaining separate oracle feeds, risk monitoring, and governance overhead for each market exceeds the income. The proposal doesn't specify exact cost figures, but the gap is clear: less than $5,000 per quarter in revenue versus ongoing operational expenses." Translation: "이들 시장의 부채는 1,560만
