chulgeumeun ganeunghajiman susuryoga bissaseo oneureun ipgeumman haesseo.

은/는 marks the topic and often adds a contrastive feeling.

So 출금은 가능하지만 suggests something like:

• As for withdrawals, they are possible, but...
• Withdrawals are possible, however...

The speaker is not just stating a fact. They are setting up a contrast, which continues in the next part of the sentence.

If you used 출금이 가능하지만, it would sound more like a plain subject statement. 출금은 feels more natural here because the sentence is comparing withdrawal with what actually happened afterward.

These are common banking words:

• 출금 = withdrawal
• 입금 = deposit

A helpful way to remember them:

• 출 often has the idea of going out
• 입 often has the idea of going in

So money goes out of the account with 출금, and money goes in with 입금.

가능하지만 breaks down like this:

• 가능하다 = to be possible
• -지만 = but / although

So:

• 가능하다 → 가능하지만
• it is possible, but...

In the sentence, 출금은 가능하지만 means:

• Withdrawals are possible, but...

This is a very common pattern in Korean:

• A지만 B = A, but B
• A is true, but B is also true

Here 가 marks 수수료 as the thing being described by 비싸다.

• 수수료가 비싸다 = the fee is expensive / fees are high

Using 가 is very natural when introducing the thing that has the property of being expensive.

If you said 수수료는 비싸서, that would add more contrast, like:

• As for the fee, it’s expensive...

That is possible in some contexts, but 수수료가 비싸서 is the more straightforward and natural choice here.

That is a good Korean-learning question because the expressions do not match English exactly.

In Korean, 비싸다 is commonly used for prices, fees, fares, and charges. So all of these are natural:

• 가격이 비싸다 = the price is expensive/high
• 집세가 비싸다 = the rent is expensive/high
• 수수료가 비싸다 = the fee is expensive/high

Even though English often prefers high for fees, Korean naturally uses 비싸다.

Here -서 connects two clauses and gives a reason or cause.

• 비싸다 = to be expensive
• 비싸서 = because it was expensive / since it is expensive

So:

• 수수료가 비싸서 오늘은 입금만 했어
• Because the fees were high, I only made a deposit today

This -아서/어서 form is very common for giving reasons in everyday speech.

오늘은 means as for today or today, at least.

The particle 은 adds contrast or sets the frame for the statement. It can imply:

• today, unlike maybe other days
• as for today specifically

So 오늘은 입금만 했어 has a nuance like:

• Today, I only made a deposit
• At least for today, I just deposited money

The speaker may be implying that on another day they might withdraw money, but not today.

만 means only / just.

So:

• 입금만 했어 = I only made a deposit
• I just deposited money (and didn’t do anything else like withdraw)

This is an important nuance in the sentence. The speaker is saying that although withdrawal was possible, they did only the deposit.

Other examples:

• 물만 마셨어 = I only drank water
• 숙제만 했어 = I only did homework

했어 is the casual/informal polite-down style, often used with:

• friends
• younger people
• people you are close to

했어요 is the polite style.

So:

• 입금만 했어 = casual
• 입금만 했어요 = polite

The meaning is the same, but the social tone is different.

Yes. Korean often leaves out the subject when it is obvious from context.

In 오늘은 입금만 했어, the speaker is almost certainly talking about themselves:

• (나는) 오늘은 입금만 했어
• (I) only made a deposit today

Korean omits subjects very often, especially in conversation, when the listener can easily guess them.

They are both connectors, but they do different jobs.

• 하지만 = but / however
  This introduces contrast.
• -서 = because / so
  This gives the reason.

The structure is basically:

• Withdrawals are possible, but
• because the fees are expensive,
• today I only made a deposit

So the sentence has both:

1. a contrast: possible, but...
2. a reason: because the fees are high...

That combination is completely natural.

Yes. A more polite version would be:

• 출금은 가능하지만 수수료가 비싸서 오늘은 입금만 했어요.

A more formal/written version could be:

• 출금은 가능하지만 수수료가 비싸서 오늘은 입금만 했습니다.

Same basic meaning, different speech level:

• 했어 = casual
• 했어요 = polite
• 했습니다 = formal

Yes. The sentence sounds like the speaker is explaining a decision.

The flow is:

1. Withdrawal was an option
2. But the fee was too high
3. So today I chose only to deposit

That gives it a natural explanation/justification tone, as if the speaker is answering an implied question like:

• Why didn’t you withdraw money?
• What did you do at the bank?

So the sentence does more than state actions; it explains the speaker’s reasoning.