Although universals of language pragmatics may facilitate the development of interlanguage pragmatics, L2 learners of heritage and non-heritage display a noticeably different pragmatic system in L2. Even fairly advanced language learners of Korean often lack pragmatic competence, which is the knowledge of what to say, how to say it, and to whom in a given context. In response to these issues, this presentation reports a qualitative analysis regarding the following criteria: a) discourse structure, (b) discourse function, (c) amount of information, (d) level of formality, (e) level of directness and (f) politeness. The data were collected from students attending Korean Flagship Program at Korea University (8 non-heritage learners, 13 heritage learners), whose language level was equivalent to advanced low to high in the scale of ACTFL OPI. For the data building, learners` electronic mail text as well as OPI role play transcription collected. The results from data analysis reveal that heritage and non-heritage learner groups respectively showed the predictable discourse features on their own. Data results from the students also revealed that the learners of different proficiency applied their own pragmatic competence from their own culture to their performance in various socio-pragmatic situations they encounter. Based on research findings this presentation will support the need for the ways of explicit teaching pragmatics that situate socio-cultural tasks. (Korea University)