Even the most successful firms experience a life cycle effect of rapid growth that eventually gives way to some degree of stagnation. Many firms accept gracefully the natural slowing of their growth rates as they mature, while others try to kickstart a new innovation process as soon as they perceive a slowdown upon them. Many companies fail at such attempts due to inadequate organization capabilities, competition that is too intense, or an inability to overcome legacy practices and/or costs. Some are able to sustain growth rates with new innovation (Nunes and Breene, 2011) but the numbers are small. In particular,only less than 10% of firms can restore. In a study of Fortune 100 companies (Nunes, and Breene,2011, Olson, van Beber, and Verry, 2008), 87% of the firms saw their growth stall during the period observed. Of these, 11% managed to get back on the high growth track, but 75% failed to break their fall. The remaining 13% managed to maintain a stable, sustainable path. Mostly firms in Korea have evolved so far by tracking and benchmarking the global leading companies (Lee, 2008). This paper analyzes the restoration process of the competitiveness of GM Korea, in terms of its organizational capabilities and dynamic capabilities – from the time it became a subsidiary of General Motors following its crisis as the former Daewoo Motors. This paper traces the growth of a firm applying the Double Helix Model of Fine (Fine, 1998, Kim, Park, and Song, Korean translation, 2002). In particular it examines the characteristics of the organizational capability and the dynamic capability(Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000) by evolution stage. It is notable that these characteristics have been reflected on the change in design capability of Korean parts suppliers (Song, Kim, and, Kang, 2003) and the introduction of modularity(Baldwin and Clark, 1997, 2000, Camuffo, 2000, Fujimoto, 2002a, 2002b) to control the complexity management. This paper, using Double Helix Model, traces and analyzes the evolutionary path of GM Korea. Also this paper looks into the growth track of the company from the standpoint of benefits through the cooperation (Astley and Fombrun, 1983, Lavie, 2006) between GM Korea and its parent company, GM. After the GM‘s acquisition, the company reported remarkable sales performance both in the domestic and global market as GM’s home for mini and small vehicles development, followed by a steep downfall after the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. Post-crisis, the management team has rebuilt the company as GM Korea. To fully explore this process, this paper traces the evolutionary path of GM, the mother company, as it played a significant role of leading GM Korea to its recent successes. This paper’s conceptual structure borrows from Fine’s Double Helix Model (Fine, 1998). This study may be used in learning and capturing strategic lessons on the future study on the evolution path of the Korean automobile industry for the sustainability. The analysis of this paper focuses on the time period from 2002 through 2009 when both GM Korea and GM together were in the process of rebuilding GM Korea to stabilize the operation through the strategic collaboration between them. Nevertheless, GM Korea may pursue the short term performance after 2009 reflecting the policy of GM which has been restored by the support of US government, but still encountering difficulty in terms of competition. Renaming of GM Korea partly reflects the strategy of GM. GM Korea may take into consideration the position of GM in the future. If this supposition comes true, the relationship between the two companies may be less cooperative and become competitive. Also this kind of different situation may weaken the win-win relationship between GM Korea and its Korean parts suppliers as well as influence the business ecosystem(Kim, 2009). of the entire automobile industry in Korea .