.forge/SPRING-ARC-REFERENCE-1783832425-attempt-4.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# SPRING-ARC-REFERENCE-1783832425-attempt-4
+
+Forge 이슈 작업 브랜치 `forge/SPRING-ARC-REFERENCE-1783832425-attempt-4`.

docs/architecture/adr-payment-boundary.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+# Architecture Decision Record: Payment Boundary
+
+## Context
+In the process of defining a payment transition architecture, it is essential to delineate clear boundaries regarding payments. This includes how payments are processed, managed, and interacted with other services within the larger application ecosystem.
+
+## Decision
+The payment boundary will be established to segregate payment functionalities from other domains. This will facilitate clearer service contracts, promote scalability, and enhance maintainability. The boundaries defined are:
+1. **Payment Processing** - Manage all transaction flows, including initiation, validation, and completion.
+2. **Payment Storage** - Handle data persistence for transactions, ensuring compliance with security protocols.
+3. **Payment Notifications** - Direct communication with users and systems regarding the status of transactions.
+
+Additional services such as audits and reporting will be encapsulated within the payment context but operate on a separate service layer.
+
+## Alternatives
+- **Single Service**: All payment functionalities within one service.
+  - **Pros**: Simplicity in managing. 
+  - **Cons**: Difficult to scale and maintain, especially with increased complexity.
+- **Microservices**: Distributed payment functions.
+  - **Pros**: Improved separation of concerns, easier to manage separately.
+  - **Cons**: Increased complexity in inter-service communication.
+
+The decision leans towards microservices for better scalability and maintainability of the payment system.
+
+## Consequences
+Implementing a microservices approach to the payment boundary means that each service can be scaled independently, enhancing performance. However, it also requires robust inter-service communication strategies and potentially higher operational overhead due to multiple service deployments.