Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are essential tools for promoting evidence-based practice and structured clinical reasoning in Korean medicine. Despite their growing availability, engaging students and faculty with CPGs in educational settings remains limited and fragmented. Questions remain about how learners and educators perceive CPGs and how meaningful engagement with these guidelines can be fostered in Korean medicine education. Objectives: This qualitative study explores faculty perspectives on CPG engagement in Korean medicine education to identify current practices, barriers, and strategies for effective educational integration. Specifically, we examined: (1) How do faculty members view the educational use of CPGs? and (2) What strategies can enhance CPG engagement and improve Korean medical education. Methods: Structured written interviews were conducted with 20 faculty members from 11 Korean medicine institutions nationwide, representing clinical medicine (n=14), basic medicine (n=4), and medical education (n=5) expertise. Interviews explored faculty perspectives on CPG-based education, including current practices, expectations, perceived barriers, and strategies for integration. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis following a six-phase framework, facilitated by ATLAS.ti 25. A complementary nationwide survey of students assessing their CPG understanding, learning experiences, and perceived utility is currently in progress. Results: Faculty emphasized the need for strengthening evidence-based medicine foundations as a prerequisite for meaningful CPG engagement. They identified fragmented CPG exposure during undergraduate education as a major barrier and advocated for more interactive pedagogies such as case-based learning and team-based learning. Educators highlighted the importance of shifting from passive reference use to active, application-oriented learning approaches. Current CPG limitations were also noted, including weak connectivity between diagnostic and treatment components, low usability in educationalcontexts, lack of contextual adaptation, and insufficient educational support tools. Conclusion: Faculty perspectives reveal that developing critical thinking skills and CPG literacy is key to transforming CPGs from static references into active learning resources. Dual innovation is essential, requiring both enhanced CPG quality through improved connectivity, user-centered design, and AI adoption, and strengthened educational systems through evidence based medicine foundations, faculty engagement, and institutional alignment. Integration with forthcoming student survey data will provide comprehensive insights for cultivating learners who can critically and effectively engage with CPGs within clinical reasoning in Korean medicine.