tags. Let's start with the title: "Tanker Struck by Projectile Near Oman, Raising Strait of Hormuz Security Fears" -> Translate to Korean. We'll keep "Oman" and "Strait of Hormuz" as is. So something like: "오만 인근에서 유조선이 발사체에 피격, 호르무즈 해협 안보 우려 고조" but we need to keep the original proper nouns. Actually, "Strait of Hormuz" is often translated as "호르무즈 해협" but that's a translation. The instruction says keep proper nouns in original form, so we might write "Strait of Hormuz" as is. But that would be awkward in Korean. I think the instruction means keep names of people, companies, etc., but geographic names might be translated? Usually, we translate geographic names. But to be safe, we'll follow the instruction: "Keep proper nouns (names, company names) in original form" - it says names, company names, not necessarily geographic. So we can translate geographic names. But "Oman" is a country name, we can transliterate as "오만". "Strait of Hormuz" is a geographic feature, we can translate as "호르무즈 해협". I think it's acceptable to translate them. The instruction specifically mentions names and company names, so we can translate country and place names. Let's do that. We'll translate "Oman" as "오만", "Strait of Hormuz" as "호르무즈 해협", "Persian Gulf" as "페르시아만", "Gulf of Oman" as "오만만", "Arabian Peninsula" as "아라비아 반도", "Saudi Aramco" as "사우디 아람코" (company name, but we keep as is? Actually, it's a company name, so we keep as "Saudi Aramco" or transliterate? The instruction says keep proper nouns in original form, so we'll write "Saudi Aramco" as is, but in Korean text, it's common to write it as "사우디 아람코" but that's a transliteration. Since it's a company name, we should keep it as "Saudi Aramco" in English? That might look odd. I think we should transliterate company names as well, but the instruction says "keep proper nouns (names, company names) in original form" - so we write them in English. But in a Korean translation, it's normal to write foreign names in English or transliterate. To be precise, we'll keep them in English as they appear, but that might break the flow. I'll interpret "original form" as the original spelling, so we write "Oman" as "Oman", "Strait of Hormuz" as "Strait of Hormuz", etc. But that would be unnatural. Let's check the instruction: "Keep proper nouns (names, company names) in original form" - it says names and company names, not all proper nouns. So we can translate geographic names. For example, "Oman" is a country name, we can translate to "오만". "Strait of Hormuz" is a geographic feature, we can translate to "호르무즈 해협". "Persian Gulf" -> "페르시아만". "Gulf of Oman" -> "오만만". "Arabian Peninsula" -> "아라비아 반도". "Saudi Aramco" is a company name, so we keep as "Saudi Aramco" in English? Or we can write "사우디 아람코" but that's a transliteration, not original. I think it's acceptable to write it in English. But in a Korean article, it's common to write foreign company names in English. So we'll keep "Saudi Aramco" as is. Similarly, "OPEC+" can be kept as "OPEC+". We'll keep acronyms. We'll translate the content naturally. Let's do the translation step by step. First, the title: "Tanker Struck by Projectile Near Oman, Raising Strait of Hormuz Security Fears" -> Korean: "오만 인근 유조선 피격, 호르무즈 해협 안보 우려 고조" but we need to keep the meaning. I'll go with: "오만 인근에서 유조선이 발사체에 피격되어 호르무즈 해협 안보 우려가 커지고 있다" but that's long. For a title, we can be concise: "오만 인근 유조선 피격, 호르무즈 해협 안보 위협" but let's keep the original structure: "Tanker Struck by Projectile Near Oman" -> "오만 인근 유조선, 발사체 피격" and "Raising Strait of Hormuz Security Fears" -> "호르무즈 해협 안보 우려 고조" So combined: "오만 인근 유조선 피격, 호르무즈 해협 안보 우려 고조" That works. Now the content: We'll translate each paragraph. First paragraph: "A tanker was hit by an unknown projectile off the coast of Oman on Tuesday, an incident that is ratcheting up security concerns in the Strait of Hormuz — a narrow waterway that carries roughly a fifth of the world's oil. The attack, which authorities are still investigating, has no immediate claim of responsibility, but it threatens to disrupt the flow of crude and natural gas through one of the most strategically vital chokepoints on the planet." Translation: "화요일 오만 연안에서 유조선이 정체불명의 발사체에 피격당했다. 이 사건은 세계 원유의 약 5분의 1이 지나가는 좁은 수로인 호르무즈 해협의 안보 우려를 높이고 있다. 당국이 아직 조사 중인 이번 공격은 즉각적인 책임 주장이 없지만, 지구상에서 가장 전략적으로 중요한 병목 지점 중 하나를 통과하는 원유와 천연가스의 흐름을 방해할 위협이 되고 있다." But we need to preserve the HTML structure. So we'll put it inside
tags. Second paragraph: "The vessel was struck while transiting international waters east of Oman, according to maritime security reports. Details about the ship's flag, cargo, and crew remain scarce. No group has yet said it carried out the strike, and investigators are working to determine the type of projectile used. The location puts the incident squarely in the approaches to the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman all have maritime boundaries." Translation: "해상 안보 보고서에 따르면 선박은 오만 동쪽 국제 해역을 통과하던 중 피격됐다. 선박의 국적, 화물, 선원에 대한 세부 정보는 아직 부족하다. 아직 어떤 단체도 공격을 주장하지 않았으며, 조사관들은 사용된 발사체의 종류를 파악하기 위해 노력하고 있다. 이 위치는 이란, 아랍에미리트, 오만이 모두 해상 경계를 접하고 있는 호르무즈 해협 접근로에 정확히 해당한다." Third paragraph: "This is not the first time a commercial vessel has been targeted in the region. Over the past several years, a series of limpet mine attacks, drone strikes, and hijackings have been blamed on Iranian forces or their proxies, though Tehran has consistently denied involvement in most cases. The new attack comes amid heightened tensions between Iran and the West over Tehran's nuclear program and its support for armed groups in the Middle East." Translation: "이 지역에서 상업 선박이 표적이 된 것은 이번이 처음이 아니다. 지난 몇 년 동안 일련의 부착 기뢰 공격, 드론 공격, 납치 사건이 이란군 또는 그 대리 세력의
