Museums entered the new milleniurn of 'Culture' , are changing and expanding their own role as one of the cultural subjects. However, it was almost irnpossible that museums could meet all the variety of ‘cultural cravings’ of the public with their passive and static conditions. The public has already begun to concentrate on 'the qualitative abundance of life' with the high level of economic growth followed by more pleasable life. It has been yet recognized that people can take truly human life as they enjoy the cultural benefit. All of these surroundings have made a thesaurus of culture' , a museurn as a cultural institution becomes the core of all others. A museum is an equivalent place for the public. As shown in its definition, a museum is a ‘social educational institution' where all people can enjoy, rest and learn things, fact, phenomena, etc., and anyone can visit and approach much closer to everyday life. Despite all of these changes, the disabled are not still recognized as a part of 'the public . It is true that the disabled had no opportunity to discuss 'cultural life' or 'the quality of life' . However, it could be another reason for the negligence that people unconsciously do not consider 'the disabled' in the aspect of 'culture' . Now, people have to recognize that the life of the disabled may take the cultural benefit. In a short words, it will be an index of truly human life. This study attempted to make out general plans so that the disabled can take cultural benefits and favors equally as common people do. The present conditions, the concept and the definition of the disabled, were examined with the right of the disabled guaranteed by the Declaration of Hurnan Rights. What a museum as a place of culture and welfare do for the disabled, is also mentioned with the statistic data showing the culture-related life form of the disabled. The programs that could possibly be realized in the alternatives of museums such as the cultural institutions in the residential district of the disabled, or through the practical use of the community environments are suggested. It is made clear that the main reason why the disabled can not easily approach the cultural institutions. The main reason is that most of cultural institutions, especially museums have very poor ‘access’ facilities for the disabled. The condition of ‘museum facilities’ included general facilities and the special ones for the disabled at the level of national and advanced museums, quite well designed. The programs for the disabled are principally executed in an 'educational institution’ such as the advanced museums, the current subject or contents of the programs are emphasized the concept of human rights, and the facilities for the disabled are well illustrated through the comparison of each example. In Korea, approxirnately 30 new museums or galleries are registered each year, and the total number of museums is 273 at present May 2003. The culture-related institutions are spread over 1,000. Yet the places where are endowed with facilities and various programs for the disabled, are almost none but only a few around Seoul area, and the professionals for those facilities and programs are not stationed for them. To connect a ‘museum’ and ‘the disabled’ could be somewhat unfamiliar. It is quite possible that to discuss the cultural issues related with the disabled is not necessary in reality. Therefore, people have to consider the socio-cultural issues and further to prepare things for the disabled. As the programs for the common public are to be considered, those for the disabled should be done so as well. Any external form of human being can not be the criterion for taking advantage of public service offered equally to any one. It is the only hope that this study could be any help, though petty, in preparing and developing the scientific systems, relevant cultural institutions and the adequate educational programs for the disable.