saengseoneul guun da-eume baro meogeosseoyo.

생선을 uses the object particle -을/를, because fish is what is being grilled and eaten.

• 생선 = fish
• -을 = object marker used after a noun ending in a consonant

So 생선을 구운 다음에 means after grilling the fish...

If you used 생선은, that would mark fish as the topic, which changes the feel of the sentence.

Korean uses:

• -을 after a noun ending in a consonant
• -를 after a noun ending in a vowel

생선 ends in ㄴ, which is a consonant, so it becomes 생선을.

This is because 굽다 changes form when it comes before a noun.

Here, it is part of the pattern:

V-(으)ㄴ 다음에 = after doing V

So:

• 굽다 = to grill / roast
• 구운 다음에 = after grilling

This happens because 굽다 is a ㅂ-irregular verb, so the ㅂ changes in this form:

• 굽다
• 구운
• 구워요
• 구웠어요

So 구운 is the correct modifier form here.

Because 다음 is a noun, and the verb before a noun must be in a modifier form, not a normal past-tense sentence form.

So Korean uses:

• 구운 다음에 = after grilling
• not 구웠 다음에

In other words, the -ㄴ/은 form here is not just simple past tense by itself. It is part of the grammar pattern V-(으)ㄴ 다음에.

Here, 다음에 means after.

Literally, 다음 means something like next or following, and -에 is a particle. But in the pattern:

V-(으)ㄴ 다음에

it means:

after doing V

So:

• 구운 다음에 = after grilling
• 생선을 구운 다음에 바로 먹었어요 = After grilling the fish, I ate it right away.

No. It can mean different things depending on context.

For example:

• 다음에 봐요 = See you next time / see you later
• 밥을 먹은 다음에 공부했어요 = I studied after eating

In your sentence, because 다음에 comes after a verb phrase, it means after doing something, not next time.

바로 means right away, immediately, or directly.

So the sentence does not just mean I ate it after grilling it. It means:

I ate it immediately after grilling it.

It adds a sense of no delay between the two actions.

Because Korean often leaves out words that are already understood from context.

In English, you might say:

• After grilling the fish, I ate it right away.

In Korean, once 생선을 has already appeared, the object of 먹었어요 is understood to be the same fish, so it does not need to be repeated.

A fuller version could be:

• 생선을 구운 다음에 바로 생선을 먹었어요

But that sounds repetitive, so the shorter version is much more natural.

The subject is omitted.

That is very common in Korean when the subject is clear from context. Depending on the situation, it could mean:

• I ate it right away
• we ate it right away
• he/she ate it right away

In many textbook-style translations, it is usually understood as I.

먹었어요 is:

• past tense
• polite style

Breakdown:

• 먹- = eat
• -었- = past tense
• -어요 = polite ending

So 먹었어요 means ate in a polite, everyday style.

It is less formal than 먹었습니다, but still polite.

Yes. The order is very clear:

1. 생선을 구운 다음에 = after grilling the fish
2. 바로 먹었어요 = ate it right away

So the fish was grilled first, then eaten immediately afterward.

Yes, that is also natural.

• 생선을 구운 다음에 바로 먹었어요
• 생선을 구워서 바로 먹었어요

Both can mean I grilled the fish and then ate it right away.

A small difference in feeling:

• 구운 다음에 emphasizes the sequence a bit more clearly: after grilling
• 구워서 connects the actions more smoothly: grilled it and then ate it

In this sentence, both are fine, but 구운 다음에 sounds slightly more explicit about the order.