Given the fact that Korea has been divided into south and north for more than half a century, significant differences in historical perspective are found in the two Koreas. History textbooks best show the gaps between the South and North perspectives on Korean history. Therefore, research on the commonalities and differences in South Korea’s and North Korea’s history textbooks is worth doing in order to overcome the discrepancy between historical perspectives and to redevelop Korean nationality in the future. Furthermore, research on gaps in the textbooks will provide a significant basis for history education in the united Korea. The purpose of this comparative study is to analyze the differences in narrative structure and content in secondary history textbooks in South Korea and North Korea, focusing on Im-jin-wae-ran (i.e. Japanese invasions of Korea, 1592-1598). Research objects included eight types of middle-school- level history textbooks published in South Korea and the junior-high level history textbook used in North Korea. First, the history textbooks were reviewed and compared in terms of the general object and purpose of history education, curriculum and constructs of the history textbooks, and the characteristics of textbook narration. The comparison revealed that Yeoksa is written from many different viewpoints, while Joseonyeoksa holds an anti-imperialist and ultra-nationalist point of view, putting emphasis on the superiority of Korea. Next, the narrative structure of Im-jin-wae-ran in the two countries’ textbooks were examined, focusing on the unit structure, pagination (quantity), narration, and extra-curriculum materials. The analysis showed that Yeoksa descriptively explains the background, process, and results of the war evenly, whereas Joseonyeoksa focuses more on the process of the war with narrative description. Lastly, the content of description of Im-jin-wae-ran was compared with respect to perspectives on war, terms, causes of the war, domestic and regional circumstances, the early stage of the war, activities of the Joseon Dynasty’s navy and the contribution of loyal armies, outcomes of the war, and the relationship between the Joseon Dynasty and Japan after the war. The results of the analysis suggested possible improvements in Im-jin-wae-ran description in history textbooks for the sake of history education in the united Korea. Both Yeoksa and Joseonyeoksa put an emphasis on the Joseon Dynasty’s navy and General Lee’s activities and contributions to the war however, Joseonyeoksa includes a negative assessment of General Lee because of his advocacy of the nobility, which resulted from the limited perspective of his social status. Also, Joseonyeoksa significantly emphasizes the loyal armies’ activities, focusing more on the royal armies from the geographically northern part of the Joseon Dynasty. In conclusion, research on South and North Korean history textbooks, which reflect the discrepancy in historical perspectives between the two Koreas, is necessary in order to provide a consensual basis for history education in the two countries and to develop the Korean identity. Therefore, the significance of this comparative study of the Im-jin-wae-ran, which is regarded as one of the most important international wars in the history of the Korean Peninsula, is found in its contribution to the integrated history education of the two Koreas and the development of a shared Korean nationality.