Rural areas along Korea's Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) maintain strong internal community networks despite geographical isolation and limited external connectivity. In many of these areas, where tourism infrastructure remains underdeveloped due to military restrictions, community-led tourism initiatives have emerged, laying the groundwork for resident-driven Living Lab operations. However, rural Living Labs require different strategies compared to urban settings. Rural communities often lack familiarity with the Living Lab concept and show limited demographic diversity. Therefore, preliminary education, workshops, and the clear definition of facilitator and external stakeholder roles are critical for successful implementation. This study explores how Living Labs can be designed and applied to revitalize rural border areas, focusing on Yeoncheon-gun in Gyeonggi Province. Cases such as the development of Imjingang Dappssari Park in Yeoncheon-gun and crane conservation activities in Cheorwon-gun, illustrate the potential of resident-led participation and cooperation. However, the aging population and lack of specialized skills in rural areas suggest that sustained tourism management is difficult without systematic support. Thus, rural Living Labs must establish collaborative structures among residents, experts, and public institutions, ensuring tangible benefits for the communities involved. Two Living Lab experiments were conducted in Yeoncheon in 2024. The first, a community mapping Lab, aimed to enhance residents' engagement in identifying local issues and analyzing participation processes. The second, a problem-solving Lab, involved geopark interpreters with a high level of interest and experience, who tackled city tour bus operation challenges using techniques like persona development and customer journey mapping. Post-Lab in-depth interviews revealed that participants, accustomed to passive educational experiences, perceived the structured problem-solving process as something they had not previously encountered. They appreciated moving beyond problem identification to solution development, occasionally referencing external case studies. This indicates a need for continuous education, repeated participatory experiences, and awareness-building to establish a participatory culture through Living Labs in rural border areas. Public and private sector participants noted challenges in involving residents with diverse interests, citing time constraints and complaints management as key obstacles. These realities underscore that while rural communities show strong internal cohesion, structured support mechanisms are essential for sustaining participatory innovation models like Living Labs. In conclusion, the revitalization of rural border areas through Living Labs demands tailored designs that reflect local characteristics and capacities. Existing policy instruments such as funds aimed at addressing population decline, participatory budgeting, and community development initiatives should be strategically integrated to build sustainable, action-oriented Living Lab frameworks for rural revitalization.