oneul achimeneun gyul du gaehago boksunga han gaeman meogeosseo.

에 marks a time expression, so 오늘 아침에 means this morning / in the morning.

Adding 는 makes that time phrase the topic or contrastive topic:

• 오늘 아침에 = this morning
• 오늘 아침에는 = as for this morning, or at least this morning

So 오늘 아침에는 gives a slight sense of setting the scene, and it can also imply contrast, like:

• This morning, I only ate two tangerines and one peach.
• Maybe at another time I ate something else.

This 에는 combination is very common in Korean.

Korean uses special shortened forms of some native Korean numbers before counters.

Before a counter like 개, the forms change like this:

• 하나 → 한
• 둘 → 두
• 셋 → 세
• 넷 → 네

So:

• 한 개 = one item
• 두 개 = two items

That is why 복숭아 한 개 and 귤 두 개 are correct.

개 is a very common general counter for things.

Both 귤 and 복숭아 are countable objects, so 개 works naturally:

• 귤 두 개 = two tangerines
• 복숭아 한 개 = one peach

Korean usually needs a counter when counting nouns directly. You normally do not just say the equivalent of two tangerines without a counter.

하고 means and in this sentence.

So:

• 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개 = two tangerines and one peach

It is a common, conversational way to connect nouns.

Other ways to say and with nouns include:

• 와/과 — a bit more neutral or formal
• (이)랑 — casual

So these are similar:

• 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개
• 귤 두 개와 복숭아 한 개
• 귤 두 개랑 복숭아 한 개

만 means only or just.

So 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어 by itself would mean:

• I ate only one peach.

In the full sentence, 만 gives the sense that the amount eaten was limited:

• I ate only two tangerines and one peach this morning.

It often carries a nuance like:

• that was all
• nothing more than that

In this sentence, it is most naturally understood as applying to the whole combined phrase:

• 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어
• = I ate only two tangerines and one peach

Even though 만 is attached to the last item, in a coordinated phrase like this it commonly scopes over the whole noun phrase.

So the meaning is not usually:

• I ate two tangerines, and only one peach

Instead, it is more naturally:

• The only things I ate were two tangerines and one peach.

Context can affect interpretation, but the whole-list reading is the normal one here.

Korean often leaves out 을/를 in everyday speech when the meaning is already clear.

A fuller version could be:

• 오늘 아침에는 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만을 먹었어
• or more naturally
• 오늘 아침에는 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어

With 만, the object marker is often unnecessary, and casual Korean frequently drops particles anyway.

So this omission is very normal and natural.

먹었어 is the casual, informal form:

• 먹다 = to eat
• 먹었어 = ate / I ate

This form is used with:

• friends
• younger people
• family
• people you speak casually with

Compare:

• 먹었어 = casual
• 먹었어요 = polite
• 먹었습니다 = formal

So the sentence is in casual speech. If you wanted a polite version, you could say:

• 오늘 아침에는 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어요.

Korean often omits subjects when they are understood from context.

So even though English needs I in I ate..., Korean can simply say:

• 오늘 아침에는 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어.

The listener usually understands that the speaker means I.

If you wanted to include it, you could say:

• 나는 오늘 아침에는 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 먹었어.

But in natural conversation, leaving it out is very common.

Korean is basically an SOV language: Subject–Object–Verb.

So the verb usually comes at the end.

Structure here:

• 오늘 아침에는 = this morning
• 귤 두 개하고 복숭아 한 개만 = two tangerines and one peach only
• 먹었어 = ate

That is why the sentence ends with the verb.

Yes, slightly.

• 오늘 아침에 simply states the time: this morning
• 오늘 아침에는 adds topic/contrast nuance: as for this morning or this morning, at least

So 는 can make the sentence feel a bit like:

• This morning, I only ate two tangerines and one peach.
• Maybe lunch or dinner was different.

The difference is often subtle, but it is real.

Yes. Because of 만, the sentence can suggest that the speaker ate only that much, which may sound like a small amount.

So depending on context, it can imply:

• that was all I had
• I didn’t eat much this morning

That nuance comes from 만 and from the specific quantities being small.

Yes.

귤 usually means a small citrus fruit like a mandarin or tangerine, not a large orange.

So:

• 귤 = tangerine/mandarin-type fruit
• 오렌지 = orange

So 귤 두 개 is more naturally two tangerines than two oranges.