Friday, February 27, 2009

Some US Lawmakers Call for 'Truth Commission' to Investigate Bush Policies

By Cindy Saine
Washington, VOA
25 February 2009

Senator Patrick Leahy
Influential Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy has proposed that an independent "truth commission" be established to investigate alleged abuses of power under the Bush administration. President Barack Obama has reacted cautiously to the suggestion, saying he is more interested in looking forward than backwards.

Several Democratic lawmakers have joined a number of human-rights organizations in calling for an investigation of the Bush administration's counter-terrorism policies. Controversial policies include certain interrogation techniques used at U.S. detention centers in Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the warrant-less wiretapping of U.S. citizens.

Speaking at Georgetown University earlier this month, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said there was a "dangerous departure from the rule of law" during the Bush administration, and that Congress needs to make sure America gets back on the right track.

"One path to that goal would be a reconciliation process, a truth commission. We could develop and authorize a person, a group of people universally recognized as fair-minded, without any ax to grind [no personal or political interest]. Their straightforward mission would be to find the truth. People would be told to come forward and share their knowledge and experiences, not for purposes of constructing criminal indictments, but to assemble the facts, he said.

Leahy said he envisions the panel modeled after the truth commission in South Africa that investigated the apartheid era, and that immunity from prosecution could be offered to those who cooperate.

"Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened. And sometimes the best way to move forward, is to find out the truth, find out what happened, and we do that to make sure it never happens again," he said.

Leahy has also made clear that Democratic lawmakers who supported questionable Bush administration policies must also be investigated, which may help to explain why not many Democratic lawmakers have been clamoring for the commission.


A 2008 file photo of House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., on Capitol Hill
One notable exception is House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, who has called for a National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties, with subpoena power, much like the 9/11 Commission.

Elizabeth Goitien of the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy institute, agrees that some sort of truth commission could help U.S. credibility.

"Now in order to do that, the commission would have to be set up correctly, I mean it would have to have real teeth and real powers. It would have to have subpoena power, it would have to get cooperation from the government and there would have to be the force of law behind it to make sure that it got cooperation. And it would have to be thorough and unflinching. But I think if a commission were to be set up the right way and to do a good job, then I think "yes", it could demonstrate to the rest of the world that we are very serious about accountability," she said.

Most Republican lawmakers oppose investigating the Bush administration, saying such a probe could compromise counter-terrorism efforts.

Moderate Republican Senator Arlen Specter rejected the idea of truth commissions, saying if every administration started to examine what the previous administration did, there would be no end to it.


President Barack Obama addresses a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber of the Capitol in Washington, 24 Feb 2009
President Obama has not endorsed the truth commission. At a nationally-televised prime-time news conference earlier this month, he was asked about Leahy's proposal, and said he would review it.

"Nobody is above the law, and if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen. But, that generally speaking, I am more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards," he said.

Mr. Obama may fear an investigation could inflame the kind of partisan divisions he has said he wants to avoid. Also the president will likely need Republican support to deal with the economic crisis and challenges such as health care and foreign policy issues.

But a USA Today/Gallup poll this month found that 62 percent of Americans support either a criminal investigation or an independent panel to look into allegations of torture and other abuses of power during the Bush administration.

Human Rights Report; the US State Department

Below is the Human Rights Report of the US State Department, released on Feb. 25. Amongst dozens of nations, the one of the Republic of Korea is extracted here for your reference. How objectively they were written? I guess that's upto your own judgement. For those, who think they understand Korea, let me hear your voice. (beforethedawn7@gmail.com)

U.S. Department of State

2008 Human Rights Report: Republic of Korea
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2008 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
February 25, 2009
The Republic of Korea (Korea or ROK) is a constitutional democracy governed by a president and a unicameral legislature. The country has a population of approximately 48 million. In April the Grand National Party obtained a majority of National Assembly seats in a free and fair election. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces.
The government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas. Women, persons with disabilities, and minorities continued to face societal discrimination. Rape, domestic violence, child abuse, and trafficking in persons remained serious problems.
RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:
a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life
There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.
Official figures indicated that hazing was a factor in many of the 321 suicides by military personnel since 2004.
b. Disappearance
There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances.
c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits mistreatment of suspects, and officials generally observed this prohibition in practice.
The government continued to investigate incidents of possible abuse under the country's former military regimes. As of November the Commission for the Restoration of Honor and Compensation to Activists of the Democratization Movement had reviewed 11,241 of the 13,348 cases reported since its creation in 2000 and determined that compensation was due in 8,908 of them.
Prison and Detention Center Conditions
Prison and detention center conditions generally met international standards, and the government permitted visits by independent human rights observers.
d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention
The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, and the government generally observed these prohibitions. However, the National Security Law (NSL) grants the authorities broad powers to detain, arrest, and imprison persons who commit acts the government views as intended to endanger the "security of the state." Critics continued to call for reform or abolishment of the law, contending that its provisions did not define prohibited activity clearly. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) maintained that the courts had established legal precedents for strict interpretation of the law that preclude arbitrary application. The number of NSL investigations and arrests has dropped significantly in recent years.
During the year authorities arrested 16 persons and prosecuted another 27 persons for alleged NSL violations. Of those prosecuted, four were found guilty; the remaining 23 were on trial as of year's end. In August authorities indicted a secondary school teacher on charges of violating the NSL for distributing materials related to the May 1980 Kwangju uprising. At the end of the year he was awaiting trial without physical detention. In another case four members of a nongovernmental organization (NGO) were detained and charged in September with illegal contact with Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) agents and distribution of North Korean press material for the purpose of exalting DPRK leader Kim Jong-il. The NGO claimed the government used falsehoods against the four and filed a defamation claim for damages. At year's end the four were in detention awaiting trial, and the defamation claim had not been settled.
In November 2007 a university professor found guilty of violating the NSL and sentenced in 2006 to two years in prison lost his final appeal.
An Amnesty International (AI) report alleged there were arbitrary arrests of bystanders on at least three occasions during demonstrations against President Lee Myung-bak in Seoul between May and September. Those arrested were detained and released. The Korean National Police Agency (KNPA) stated that police followed the requirements of the law in responding to the demonstrations. The MOJ reported that official investigations had not confirmed any instances of arbitrary arrest as of year's end.
Role of the Police and Security Apparatus
Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the KNPA, and the government has effective mechanisms to investigate and punish abuse and corruption.
AI reported that some riot police dispatched to demonstrations in Seoul between May and September had hidden their name badges or not worn them. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) also reported that some riot police had covered their nametags with black tape and recommended that the KNPA ensure that police nametags are easily visible.
Arrest and Detention
The law requires warrants in cases of arrest, detention, seizure, or search, except if a person is apprehended while committing a criminal act or if a judge is not available and the authorities believe that a suspect may destroy evidence or escape capture if not quickly arrested. In such cases a public prosecutor or judicial police officer must prepare an affidavit of emergency arrest immediately upon apprehension of the suspect. Police may not question for more than six hours persons who voluntarily submit to questioning at police stations. Authorities generally must release an arrested suspect within 20 days unless an indictment is issued. An additional 10 days of detention is allowed in exceptional circumstances.
There is a bail system, but human rights lawyers stated that bail generally was not granted for detainees who were charged with committing serious offenses, might attempt to flee or harm a previous victim, or had no fixed address.
The law provides for the right to representation by an attorney, including during police interrogation. There are no restrictions on access to a lawyer, but the authorities can limit a lawyer's participation in an interrogation if the lawyer obstructs the interrogation or divulges information that impedes an investigation. The courts generally observed a defendant's right to a lawyer. During both detention and arrest periods, an indigent detainee may request that the government provide a lawyer.
Access to family members during detention varies according to the level of crime being investigated. There were no reports of access to legal counsel being denied.
Amnesty
In August the government granted a special amnesty to approximately 342,000 persons. Most were government officials due to receive disciplinary action. Approximately 1,900 of the pardons involved Election Act violations and another 10,000 involved commutation of sentences or probation for persons convicted of other crimes.
e. Denial of Fair Public Trial
The law provides for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence in practice.
Trial Procedures
The law provides defendants with a number of rights in criminal trials, including the presumption of innocence, protection against self-incrimination, the right to a speedy trial, the right of appeal, and freedom from retroactive laws and double jeopardy. Trials are open to the public, but judges may restrict attendance if they believe spectators might disrupt the proceedings. There is a public jury system, but the verdict of the jury is not legally binding. Court-appointed lawyers are provided by the government (at government expense) in cases where defendants cannot afford to provide their own legal counsel. When a person is detained, the initial trial must be completed within six months of arrest. Judges generally allowed considerable scope for examination of witnesses by both the prosecution and defense. Defendants have the right to be present and to consult with an attorney, can confront or question witnesses against them, and can present witnesses and evidence on their behalf. Defendants have access to government-held evidence relevant to their cases. The constitution provides for the right to a fair trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.
Political Prisoners and Detainees
It was difficult to estimate the number of political prisoners, because it was sometimes unclear whether persons were arrested for exercising the rights of free speech and association or for committing acts of violence or espionage. The NGO Mingahyup reported that as of December, the government had imprisoned 74 persons for their political beliefs and convicted 399 conscientious objectors who failed to report for military service. However, the MOJ stated that there were no cases of incarceration for political beliefs and that the law does not distinguish conscientious objectors from others who do not report for military service.
Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies
There was an independent and impartial judiciary in civil matters, and there were no problems enforcing domestic court orders. Citizens had access to a court to bring lawsuits seeking damages for, or cessation of, a human rights violation.
f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence
The law prohibits such actions, and the government generally respected these prohibitions in practice. Some human rights groups raised concerns about possible government wiretapping abuse. The law establishes broad conditions under which the government may monitor telephone calls, mail, and other forms of communication for up to two months in criminal investigations and four months in national security cases. According to the National Assembly parliamentary audit, there were 1,149 instances of wiretapping in 2007. The National Intelligence Service conducted 87.9 percent of these. Telecommunications companies provided customer information to investigation agencies on 426,453 occasions in 2007.
The government continued to require some released prisoners to report regularly to police in accordance with the Security Surveillance Act. While the Ministry of Unification (MOU) designated precinct-level officers to handle issues brought forth by resettled DPRK refugees, the ministry claimed that there were no reporting requirements for the resettled citizens.
The NSL forbids citizens from listening to North Korean radio in their homes or reading books published in the DPRK if the government determines that the action endangers national security or the basic order of democracy in the country. However, this prohibition was rarely enforced, and the viewing of DPRK satellite telecasts in private homes is legal.
Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:
a. Freedom of Speech and Press
The law provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and the government generally respected these rights in practice. An independent press, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to ensure freedom of speech and of the press. The independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views generally without restriction. However, under the NSL the government may limit the expression of ideas that authorities consider Communist or pro-DPRK.
Internet Freedom
The government blocked violent, sexually explicit, and gambling-oriented Web sites and required site operators to rate their site as harmful or not harmful to youth, based on telecommunications laws that ban Internet service providers from offering information considered harmful to youth. The government also continued to block DPRK Web sites.
The law requires identity verification in order to post messages to Web sites with more than 300,000 visitors per day.
According to 2007 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data, 94.1 percent of households had access to the Internet through broadband connections. In addition to Internet access from home, public Internet rooms were widely available and inexpensive.
Academic Freedom and Cultural Events
There were generally no government restrictions on academic freedom or cultural events.
b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association
Freedom of Assembly
The law provides for freedom of assembly, and the government generally respected this right in practice. The law prohibits assemblies that are considered likely to undermine public order and requires police to be notified in advance of demonstrations of all types, including political rallies. The police must notify organizers if they consider an event impermissible under this law; however, police routinely approved demonstrations. The police reportedly banned some protests by groups that had not properly registered or that had been responsible for violent protests in the past.
The KNPA reported that 26 riot police were accused of abuses during the period of the "Candlelight Demonstrations" in Seoul against the administration of President Lee Myung-bak between May and September. An AI report on the demonstrations noted that protesters were mostly peaceful and the police showed "organization and restraint," but it criticized riot police for misusing water cannons and fire extinguishers; exercising excessive and unnecessary force; and kicking and beating protesters, journalists, observers, and medical volunteers with shields and batons. The report also stated that riot police were insufficiently trained in crowd control and dispersion. The NHRC also reported that police occasionally had suppressed demonstrations in an excessive manner, injuring protesters. The KNPA stated that police responded to violent and illegal demonstrations in accordance with the law. Official investigations of allegations of police abuse were ongoing at year's end.
Freedom of Association
The law provides for freedom of association, and the government generally respected this right in practice. Associations operated freely, except those deemed by the government to be seeking to overthrow the government. In December 2007, for example, Jang Min-ho, a foreign citizen and former reporter for the newspaper Joongang Daily, was sentenced to seven years and fined 19 million won (approximately $14,300) for allegedly meeting with DPRK spies. He was serving his sentence as of year's end.
c. Freedom of Religion
The law provides for freedom of religion, and the government generally respected this right in practice.
In August tens of thousands of Buddhists protested alleged discrimination by the government. Buddhist leaders denounced a police search of a temple vehicle for fugitive anti-Lee Myung-bak demonstrators and demanded the dismissal of the KNPA commissioner general, who had appeared in a poster promoting a Christian police event. In September President Lee Myung-bak expressed regret that any actions of civil servants had "caused concern within the Buddhist community." The head of the Buddhist Jogye Order accepted an apology from the police commissioner general in November.
Societal Abuses and Discrimination
The small Jewish population consists almost entirely of expatriates. There were no reports of anti-Semitic acts.
For a more detailed discussion, see the 2008 International Religious Freedom Report at www.state.gov/g/drl/irf/rpt.
d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons
Most citizens could move freely throughout the country; however, government officials restricted the movement of certain DPRK defectors by denying them passports. In January the Supreme Court ruled that the denial of a passport to one defector was "unjust." While foreign travel generally was unrestricted, the government must approve travel to the DPRK. In many cases travelers going to the DPRK must receive a briefing from the Ministry of Unification prior to departure. They must demonstrate also that their trip does not have a political purpose and is not undertaken to praise the DPRK or criticize the government. The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in assisting refugees and asylum seekers.
The law does not include provisions for forced exile of its citizens, and the government did not employ it.
Protection of Refugees
The laws provide for the granting of asylum or refugee status in accordance with the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, and the government has established a system for providing protection to refugees. However, the government routinely did not grant refugee status or asylum. In practice the government generally provided protection against the expulsion or return of refugees to countries where their lives or freedom would be threatened.
Government guidelines provide for offering temporary refuge in the case of a mass influx of asylum seekers and an alternative form of protection--a renewable, short-term permit--to those who meet a broader definition of "refugee." During the year the government recognized 36 asylum applicants as refugees, many more than in past years. However, a complex procedure and long delays in refugee status decision making continued to be problems. At year's end approximately 1,500 applications were pending decisions. Asylum seekers who were recognized as refugees received basic documentation but frequently encountered problems in exercising their rights. Like other foreigners, refugees frequently were subjected to various forms of informal discrimination.
The government continued its longstanding policy of accepting refugees from the DPRK, who are entitled to ROK citizenship. The government resettled 2,809 North Koreans during the year, resulting in 15,057 North Koreans resettled in the country.
Section 3 Respect for Political Rights: The Right of Citizens to Change Their Government
The law provides citizens with the right to change their government peacefully, and citizens exercised this right in practice through periodic, free, and fair elections held on the basis of universal suffrage for all citizens 20 years of age or older.
Elections and Political Participation
National Assembly elections held in April were free and fair.
Both the majority and the various minority political parties operated without restriction or outside interference.
In general elections, 50 percent of each party's candidates on the proportional ballot must be women, and 30 percent of each party's geographical candidates are recommended to be women. There were 41 female lawmakers in the 299-seat National Assembly, with three of 18 National Assembly committees chaired by women. Two of 13 Supreme Court justices and two of 15 cabinet ministers were women.
There were no minorities in the National Assembly.
Government Corruption and Transparency
The law provides criminal penalties for official corruption, and the government generally implemented these laws effectively. The Korea Independent Commission Against Corruption stated that the overall "cleanliness level" of the government for 2007 was 8.89 out of 10 points, an improvement from 8.77 in 2006. There were reports of officials receiving bribes and violating election laws. Several National Assembly members were found guilty of taking bribes in exchange for fixing candidate lists for proportional representation seats up for election in April. In November the prosecutor's office announced corruption indictments against 250 officials at state-backed companies, primarily for taking bribes.
By law public servants above a certain rank must register their assets, including how they were accumulated, thereby making their holdings public. Among the anticorruption agencies are the Board of Audit & Inspection and the Public Servants Ethics Committee. In February the Korea Independent Commission Against Corruption, Ombudsman of Korea, and Administrative Appeals Commission were integrated to form the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission.
The country has a Freedom of Information Act; in practice the government granted access for citizens and noncitizens alike, including foreign media.
Section 4 Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights
A wide variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. Government officials often were cooperative and responsive to their views.
The NHRC is an independent government body established to protect and promote human rights; however, it has no enforcement powers and its decisions are not binding. The NHRC investigates complaints, issues policy recommendations, and conducts education campaigns. The NHRC largely has enjoyed the government's cooperation, received adequate resources, and been considered effective.
Section 5 Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons
The law forbids discrimination on the basis of gender, religion, disability, social status, and race, and the government generally respected these provisions. However, traditional attitudes limited opportunities for women, persons with disabilities, and ethnic minorities. While courts have jurisdiction to decide discrimination claims, many of these cases were instead handled by the NHRC. During the year 1,380 such cases were brought before the NHRC.
Women
Rape remained a serious problem. Although there is no specific statute that defines spousal rape as illegal, the courts have established a precedent by prosecuting spouses in such cases. The MOJ stated that there were 7,532 reports of rape and 3,581 prosecutions during the year. In 2007 there were 15,325 registered cases of sexual violence, including rape, sexual harassment, and other sexual crimes, according to the Ministry of Gender Equality (MOGE). A study by the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs and the Korean Institute of Criminology found that annually 17.9 of every 1,000 women were victims of sexual harassment, rape, or other sexual crimes, but the reporting rate for rape was only 7.1 percent. The penalty for rape is at least three years' limited imprisonment; if a weapon is used or two or more persons commit the rape, punishment ranges from a minimum of five years' to life imprisonment.
Violence against women remained a problem. During the year the MOJ registered 11,048 cases of domestic violence and prosecuted 1,747 cases. According to an MOGE survey, approximately 30 percent of all married women were victims of domestic violence. The law defines domestic violence as a serious crime and enables authorities to order offenders to stay away from victims for up to six months. Offenders can be sentenced to a maximum five years' imprisonment or fined up to seven million won ($5,300). Offenders also may be placed on probation or ordered to see court designated counselors. The law also requires police to respond immediately to reports of domestic violence, and the police generally were responsive.
Prostitution is illegal but widespread. In July police began a crackdown on alleged prostitution-related establishments in multiple areas of Seoul, closing 61 businesses in one district and prosecuting approximately 350 persons without physical detention. The government allows for the prosecution of citizens who pay for sex or commit acts of child sexual exploitation in other countries. The Act on the Prevention of the Sex Trade and Protection of Victims Thereof, which entered into effect in September, further stipulates that the MOGE complete a report every three years on the status of domestic prostitution in addition to the involvement of citizens in sex tourism and the sex trade abroad. NGOs continued to express concern that sex tourism to China and Southeast Asia was becoming more prevalent.
The law obligates companies and organizations to take preventive measures against sexual harassment, but it continued to be a problem. The NHRC received 152 cases of sexual harassment during the year. According to the NHRC, remedies included issuance of a recommendation for redress, conciliation, mutual settlement, and resolution during investigation. The NHRC lacks the authority to impose punitive measures, which must be pursued through the court system.
The family law permits a woman to head a household, recognizes a wife's right to a portion of a couple's property, and allows a woman to maintain contact with her children after a divorce. The law also allows remarried women to change their children's family name to their new husband's name. Women enjoy the same legal rights under the constitution as men.
Women continued to experience economic discrimination in pay for substantially similar work. According to the Korea Institute of Finance, a survey of financial services companies revealed that almost 60 percent of newly created jobs in this sector were filled by women. The portion of entry-level civil service positions that women filled increased from 3.2 percent in 1992 to 49 percent in 2007. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade reported that 67.7 percent of new diplomats were women. The Ministry of Labor (MOL) stated that the employment rate of females between the ages of 15 and 64 had risen approximately 10 percentage points since 1996, from 43.6 percent to 53.1 percent. Nevertheless, relatively few women worked in managerial positions or earned more than a median income, and gender discrimination in the workplace remained a problem. An MOL survey released in April found that 53.9 percent of respondents believed that sexual discrimination within the workplace was a serious problem.
The law penalizes companies found to discriminate against women in hiring and promotions. A company found guilty of practicing sexual discrimination could be fined up to approximately five million won ($3,800) and have its name published in the newspaper. The law also provides for a public fund to support victims in seeking legal redress. Some government agencies' preferential hiring of applicants with military service (nearly always men) reinforced barriers against women, despite a Constitutional Court ruling that such preferential hiring was unconstitutional.
Children
The government demonstrated its commitment to children's rights and welfare through free public education. High quality health care was widely available to children.
From January through June, a total of 2,733 child abuse cases were reported to the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW). The MOGE maintained four centers that provided counseling, treatment, and legal assistance to child victims of sexual violence. In February the government revised the Acts on the Prevention of School Violence and Countermeasures to make sexual violence perpetrated at school subject to criminal prosecution.
The law establishes a maximum sentence of 25 years' imprisonment for the brokerage and sale of the sexual services of persons younger than 19 years of age. It also establishes prison terms for persons convicted of the purchase of sexual services of youth under age 19. The Commission on Youth Protection publicizes the names of those who commit sex offenses against minors. The law provides for prison terms of up to three years or a fine of up to 20 million won ($15,000) for owners of entertainment establishments who hire persons under age 19. The commission's definition of "entertainment establishment" includes facilities such as restaurants and cafes where children are hired illegally as prostitutes.
In July the Constitutional Court overturned a 1987 ban on prenatal gender tests, ruling that a parent's right to know outweighed the risk of male-preference abortion, a practice that the court stated was in decline.
Trafficking in Persons
The law prohibits all forms of trafficking in persons; however, there were reports that persons were trafficked to, from, through, and within the country. Women from Russia, other countries of the former Soviet Union, China, Mongolia, the Philippines, and other Southeast Asian countries were trafficked to the country for sexual exploitation and domestic servitude. They were recruited personally or answered advertisements and were flown to Korea, often with entertainer or tourist visas. In some instances, once these visa recipients arrived in the country, employers illegally held victims' passports. In addition some foreign women recruited for legal and brokered marriages with Korean men ended up in situations of sexual exploitation, debt bondage, and involuntary servitude once married. Korean women were trafficked primarily for sexual exploitation to the United States, sometimes through Canada and Mexico, as well as to other countries, such as Australia and Japan. Relatively small numbers of migrants seeking opportunities in the country were believed to have become victims of trafficking as well, although the MOL Employment Permit System reduced the number of workers trafficked into the country. There were reports that human traffickers exploited ROK passports for the purpose of human trafficking. There was no credible evidence that officials were involved in trafficking.
The law prohibits trafficking for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation, including debt bondage, and prescribes up to 10 years' imprisonment. Trafficking for forced labor is criminalized and carries penalties of up to five years' imprisonment. February revisions to the Passport Act allow for restricted issuance or confiscation of passports of persons engaging in illegal activity overseas, including sex trafficking. However, some NGOs believed the laws against sex trafficking were not being enforced to their fullest potential. During the year authorities conducted 220 trafficking investigations and prosecuted in 31 cases, all for sex trafficking. There were no reported prosecutions or convictions of labor trafficking offenses.
The Marriage Brokerage Management Act, which entered into effect in June, regulates both domestic and international marriage brokers and prescribes penalties for dishonest brokers, including sentences of up to three years' imprisonment or fines. There also are laws to protect "foreign brides" in the country and punish fraudulent marriage brokers, but NGOs claimed the laws needed to be strengthened.
The KNPA and the MOJ were principally responsible for enforcing antitrafficking laws. The government worked with the international community on investigations related to trafficking.
The government maintained a network of shelters and programs to assist victims of abuse, including trafficking victims. Victims were also eligible for medical, legal, vocational, and social support services. NGOS with funding from the government provided many of these services. NGOs reported that there was only one counseling center and two shelters in the country dedicated to foreign victims of sex trafficking. The MOJ continued to educate male clients of prostitution to correct distorted views of prostitution. During the year 17,956 individuals participated in the program.
The State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report can be found at www.state.gov/g/tip.
Persons with Disabilities
In April the Anti-Discrimination Against and Remedies for Persons with Disabilities Act (DDA) took effect. The DDA adopts a definition of discrimination encompassing direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, and denial of due conveniences, and it establishes penalties for deliberate discrimination of up to three years in prison and 30 million won ($22,600). The government, through the MOHW, initiated a five-year plan to implement a comprehensive set of policies, took measures to make homes barrier free, provided part-time employment, established a task force to introduce a long-term medical care system, and opened a national rehabilitation research center to increase opportunities and access for persons with disabilities. During the year the NHRC received 635 cases of alleged discrimination in areas such as employment, property ownership, and access to educational facilities.
Firms with more than 100 employees are required by law either to hire persons with disabilities or contribute to funds used to promote the employment of persons with disabilities. Nevertheless, the hiring of persons with disabilities remained significantly below target levels.
National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities
The country is racially homogeneous, with no sizable populations of ethnic minorities. Citizenship is based on parentage, not place of birth, and persons must demonstrate their family genealogy as proof of citizenship. Naturalization is a difficult process requiring detailed applications, a long waiting period, and a series of investigations and examinations. Because of the difficulty of establishing Korean citizenship, those not ethnically Korean remained "foreign." Many foreign workers continued to report difficult working conditions.
Other Societal Abuses and Discrimination
Despite cultural respect for the elderly, there were reports of age discrimination in the workplace. In March the government enacted the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to address age discrimination in hiring and employment.
Some observers claimed that persons with HIV/AIDS suffered from severe societal discrimination and social stigma. The law ensures the confidentiality of persons with HIV/AIDS and protects individuals from discrimination. The government supported rehabilitation programs and shelters run by private groups and subsidized medical expenses from the initial diagnosis. The government operated a Web site with HIV/AIDS information and a telephone counseling service.
The law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but societal discrimination persisted. In November a military court asked the Constitutional Court to rule on the constitutionality of rules prohibiting sexual activity between male military personnel. An opinion had not been rendered by year's end.
Section 6 Worker Rights
a. The Right of Association
The law provides workers with the right to associate freely and allows public servants to organize unions. The government continued to postpone the implementation of the 1997 law that authorizes union pluralism.
The ratio of organized labor in the entire population of wage earners in 2007 was approximately 11 percent, or 1.5 million unionists from a total of 14.7 million workers. The country has two national labor federations--the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU)--and an estimated 1,600 labor unions. The KCTU and the FKTU were affiliated with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). Most of the FKTU's constituent unions maintained affiliations with global union federations.
The government recognized a range of other labor federations, including independent white-collar federations representing hospital workers, journalists, and office workers at construction firms and government research institutes. Labor federations not formally recognized by the MOL generally operated without government interference. AI criticized the MOL for continuing to deny legal recognition to the Seoul-Gyeonggi-Incheon Migrants Trade Union (MTU), even after a high court ruled that the law protecting the right of association applied to migrant laborers. In May the government arrested and deported MTU's President Torna Limbu and Vice President Abdus Sabur for being in "irregular or undocumented status." The ITUC criticized the May arrest and deportation of the two under immigration charges as governmental antiunion repression. Previous MTU leaders also previously were arrested and deported.
By law unions must submit a request for mediation to the Labor Relations Commission before a strike; otherwise, the strike is considered illegal. In most cases the mediation must be completed within 10 days; in the case of essential services, within 15 days. Strikes initiated following this period without majority support from union membership are illegal. Striking is also prohibited in cases in which a dispute has been referred to binding arbitration. Workers employed at major defense corporations subject to the Special Act on the Defense Industry and those working in the areas of electricity generation, water supply, or production of defense products are not allowed to strike. In addition, if striking employees resort to violence, unlawful occupation of premises, or infliction of damage to facilities, their actions are deemed illegal. Strikes not specifically pertaining to labor conditions, including wages, benefits, and working hours, are also illegal. Under the penal code for "obstruction of business," arrest warrants can be issued against union leaders during an illegal strike. Striking workers can be removed by police from the premises and, along with union leaders, prosecuted and sentenced.
On December 5, authorities arrested KCTU President Lee Suk-haeng and charged him with "obstruction of business" in connection with his role organizing a general strike on July 2 to protest plans to resume foreign beef imports. Authorities also charged him with organizing solidarity action in 2007 against a retail company that allegedly subjected its workers to precarious and exploitative employment arrangements. The ITUC criticized his arrest, on warrants issued against him and 10 other KCTU and Korean Metal Workers' Union officials, as violating the government's legal obligations to respect freedom of association.
The law prohibits retribution against workers who conduct a legal strike and allows workers to file complaints of unfair labor practices against employers.
By law unions in enterprises determined to be of "essential public interest"--including railways, utilities, public health, the Bank of Korea, and telecommunications--can be ordered to submit to government-ordered arbitration. Strikes are prohibited for both central and local government officials.
b. The Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively
The law provides for the workers' right to collective bargaining and collective action, and workers exercised these rights in practice. The law also empowers workers to file complaints of unfair labor practices against employers who interfere with union organizing or who discriminate against union members. Employers found guilty of unfair practices can be required to reinstate workers fired for union activities. However, forced reinstatement was used infrequently because employers took extra precautions when firing union members. According to the ITUC, employers in some cases levied "obstruction of business" charges against union leaders who were seeking to bargain collectively or engage in regular union activities.
The law permits public servants to organize trade unions and bargain collectively, although it restricts the public service unions from collective bargaining on topics such as policy-making issues and budgetary matters.
The government designated enterprises in the two export processing zones (EPZs) as public interest enterprises. Workers in these enterprises have the rights enjoyed by workers in other sectors, and labor organizations are permitted in the EPZs. However, foreign companies operating in the EPZs are exempt from some labor regulations. For example, foreign-invested enterprises are exempt from provisions that mandate monthly leave, paid holidays, and menstruation leave for women; give preferential treatment to patriots, veterans, and their families; obligate companies with more than 300 persons to recruit persons with disabilities for at least 2 percent of their workforce; encourage companies to reserve 3 percent of their workforce for workers over 55 years of age; and restrict large companies from participating in certain business categories.
c. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor
The law prohibits forced or compulsory labor, including by children, and there were no reports that such practices occurred.
d. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment
The law protects children from exploitation in the workplace and prohibits forced or compulsory labor, and the government effectively enforced these laws through regular inspections. Child labor was not considered a problem.
The labor standards law prohibits the employment of persons under age 15 without a special employment certificate from the MOL. Because education is compulsory through middle school (approximately age 15), few special employment certificates were issued for full-time employment. To obtain employment, children under age 18 must obtain written approval from either parents or guardians. Employers must limit minors' overtime hours and are prohibited from employing minors at night without special permission from the MOL.
e. Acceptable Conditions of Work
The minimum wage is reviewed annually. During the year the minimum wage was 3,770 won (approximately $2.80) per hour. The FKTU and other labor organizations asserted that the existing minimum wage did not meet the basic requirements of urban workers.
Employees of large conglomerates, publicly owned companies, banks, insurance companies with 1,000 or more registered workers, and companies with more than 50 employees work a five-day, 40-hour workweek. Labor laws mandate a 24-hour rest period each week and provide for a flexible hours system, under which employers can require laborers to work up to 48 hours during certain weeks without paying overtime (and 52 with approval from the relevant labor union), so long as average weekly hours for any given two-week period do not exceed 40 hours. If a union agrees to a further loosening of the rules, management may ask employees to work up to 56 regular hours in a given week. Workers may not be required to work more than 12 hours per working day. The labor standards law also provides for a 50 percent higher wage for overtime.
The Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA) is responsible for implementing industrial accident prevention activities. The government set health and safety standards, but the accident rate was high by international standards. During the year there were 2,422 fatalities related to industrial accidents. According to KOSHA, approximately 60 percent of work-related injuries occurred in workplaces with 50 workers or less. During the year KOSHA provided funds and technical support to improve safety and health facilities at manufacturing workplaces employing fewer than 50 employees, awareness of occupational health problems in the workplace, and safety education for migrant workers. Foreign workers reportedly were more likely to be victims of work-related injuries but were often discouraged from seeking compensation. By law an employer may not dismiss or otherwise disadvantage an employee who interrupts work and takes shelter because of an urgent hazard that could lead to an industrial accident.
Contract and other "nonregular" workers accounted for a substantial portion of the workforce. According to the government, there were approximately 5.4 million nonregular workers, comprising approximately 34 percent of the total workforce. In general nonregular workers performed work similar to regular workers but received approximately 67 percent of the wages of regular workers; 53 percent of nonregular workers were ineligible for national health and unemployment insurance and other benefits, compared with 6 percent of regular workers. In July application of the 2006 Non-Regular Workers Act was expanded to cover businesses with 100 or more employees. The vast majority of contract and other nonregular workers were not foreign workers.
The law on nonregular workers allows companies with more than 300 workers to use temporary worker contracts valid for a maximum of two years. However, labor groups alleged that employers used a loophole in the law to avoid their obligation to hire part-time workers as regular workers after the two-year time limit.
The MOJ reported that the total number of foreigners with legal working status was 494,035 as of year's end. The total number of foreign workers in illegal status was 54,518. The government continued its crackdown on illegal foreign labor.
The government continued to use the Employment Permit System (EPS) to increase protections and controls on foreign workers while easing the labor shortage in the manufacturing, construction, and agricultural sectors. Through the EPS, permit holders may work in certain industries only and have limited job mobility but generally enjoy the same rights and privileges, including the right to organize. Foreign workers were limited in their freedom to change jobs. Before changing jobs the employee's place of work must close down or the worker must have proof of physical abuse at the hand of the employer. Unless MOJ guidelines allow for an extension on humanitarian grounds, workers lose their legal status if they do not find a new employer within two months.
During the year 75,024 foreigners entered Korea under the EPS. They often encountered difficult working conditions. AI and local media reported that foreign laborers often faced physical abuse and exploitation from employers. The NGO Korea Migrant Center received reports of abuse of female entertainment visa holders. The MOJ reported that foreign workers filed 8,074 complaints related to unpaid wages during the year.
Foreign workers employed as language teachers continued to complain that the institutes for which they worked frequently violated employment contracts, but employers reported there were a large number of foreign teachers who did not fully honor their work contracts.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Will Obama Administration Launch a Truth Commission?


February 22, 2009
To Investigate or Not: Four Ways to Look Back at Bush
By SCOTT SHANE
WASHINGTON — Two days after his re-election in 1864, with Union victory in the Civil War assured, Abraham Lincoln stood at a White House window to address a boisterous crowd of supporters. He spoke of the lessons of the nation’s calamitous recent history.
“In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak and as strong; as silly and as wise; as bad and as good,” Lincoln said. “Let us, therefore, study the incidents of this as philosophy to learn wisdom from, and none of them as wrongs to be revenged.”
Today there are new calls for such study, not universal but certainly loud enough, directed this time at the Bush administration’s campaign against terrorism. Interrogation techniques that the United States had long condemned as torture, secret prisons beyond the reach of American law and eavesdropping on American soil without court warrants are at the top of a lot of lists.
But as Lincoln knew, one man’s wisdom is another’s vengeance. Repeatedly in American history, and in “truth commissions” in some two dozen countries from Argentina to Zimbabwe since the 1980s, it has turned out to be a tricky business to turn the ferocious politics of recent events into the dispassionate stuff of justice and the rule of law.
A USA Today/Gallup poll this month found that 62 percent of Americans favor either a criminal investigation or an independent panel to look into allegations of torture. Still, many people, primarily Republicans, insist the Bush policies were vital to protect the country, and the Obama administration is treading gingerly. When Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee, proposed a commission to investigate torture and eavesdropping, President Obama didn’t embrace the idea.
Already grappling with two wars and an economic meltdown, Mr. Obama said he was “more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards.” But the door was ajar; he also declared that “nobody is above the law.”
Mr. Leahy is undeterred. In an interview, he laughed and described the president’s remarks as “an enthusiastic endorsement.” He said he would work to build support for the idea in Congress.
As a senator under seven presidents, Mr. Leahy said, he has learned that the temptation to abuse powers in a crisis is bipartisan, and the commission’s review should include the role of Democrats in Congress in approving the Bush policies. The work should be done in one year, he added, to avert accusations that it was being dragged out for political gain.
Mr. Obama’s most enthusiastic supporters remain passionate about “looking backwards,” arguing that the Bush policies darkened the United States’ reputation, to Al Qaeda’s benefit. They include Representative John Conyers of Michigan, the House Judiciary chairman, who has sponsored a bill to set up an investigative panel.
Many Republicans, however, say the lofty appeals to justice and history mask an unseemly and dangerous drive to pillory the Bush administration and hamstring the intelligence agencies.
That was precisely the view of an aide in Gerald Ford’s White House named Dick Cheney when a Senate committee led by Frank Church of Idaho looked into intelligence abuses in the mid-1970s. A quarter-century later, as vice president, Mr. Cheney would effectively wreak vengeance on that committee’s legacy, encouraging the National Security Agency to bypass the warrant requirement the committee had proposed and unleashing the Central Intelligence Agency he felt the committee had shackled.
If advocates of looking back have their way, what are the options? Some past inquiries offer models, each with different potential winners and losers.
A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION (IRAN-CONTRA)
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said at his confirmation hearing that he, like Mr. Obama, did not want to “criminalize policy differences” by punishing officials for acts they believed were legal. The same language was used in 1992 by President George H. W. Bush when he pardoned six officials charged in the Iran-contra investigation. Mr. Bush called the charges “a profoundly troubling development in the history of our country: the criminalization of policy differences.”
The Iran-contra case illustrates the obstacles to any prosecution that unfolds in a polarized political atmosphere. An independent prosecutor, Lawrence E. Walsh, worked for six years to untangle shady arms deals, defiance of Congress and a cover-up. But because of the pardons and court rulings, the key figures escaped all punishment except large legal fees and damaged reputations.
The sharpest critics of the Bush programs insist that only prosecution can restore the law to its proper place. They note that some 100 terrorism suspects have died in American custody and say a prosecution for conspiracy to torture could target both the high-level officials who approved the likes of waterboarding and lawyers who justified it.
But many legal experts believe that the Justice Department would be hard pressed to prosecute as torture methods that the department itself declared in 2002 not to be torture. And if an important goal is to determine who devised the policies, a push to prosecute might only persuade past officials to lawyer up and clam up.
A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION (CHURCH)
If there is a close precedent for the investigation now being debated, it is the inquiry led by Senator Church in 1975-76, which recorded in stunning detail some of the darkest chapters in American history. Its reports chronicled the C.I.A.’s bumbling attempts to assassinate foreign leaders; the N.S.A.’s watchlisting of civil rights and antiwar activists; and the F.B.I.’s campaign to drive the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to suicide.
The reports led directly to a series of reforms, including President Ford’s ban on assassinations, the creation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to approve national-security eavesdropping and the establishment of Congressional oversight of the intelligence agencies.
But some Republicans saw Mr. Church as a showboat and his committee as overreaching. To Mr. Cheney, the Church legacy was a regrettable pruning of the president’s powers to protect the country — powers he and Bush administration lawyers reasserted after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
A BLUE-RIBBON PANEL (9/11 COMMISSION)
Though Mr. Leahy praised the Church Committee, his own proposal would take the investigation away from Congress in favor of “a group of people universally recommended as fair minded.” He also suggested subpoena power and, perhaps most important, a South Africa-style trade-off: immunity for officials who testify truthfully.
Investigative commissions date at least to 1794, when George Washington used one to negotiate a settlement of the Whiskey Rebellion. The 9/11 commission, a recent example, largely overcame partisanship and drew generally positive reviews.
A commission would free Congress to focus on current problems, including the economic crisis. And promises of immunity might answer concerns expressed last month by the departing C.I.A. director, Michael V. Hayden — that any investigation would discourage intelligence officers from acting boldly for fear of later second-guessing.
DOING NOTHING
Or more accurately, finishing up and rolling out the inquiries already under way. Even if the push for a broad investigation loses momentum, the Bush programs will not soon be forgotten. Among major inquiries expected to conclude soon: a report from the Justice Department’s ethics office on legal opinions justifying harsh interrogations; the criminal investigation of the C.I.A.’s destruction of interrogation videotapes; and a report by the Justice Department inspector general on the N.S.A.’s warrantless eavesdropping.
Meanwhile, thousands of documents relating to secrets of the Bush years are being sought by journalists and advocates. Mr. Obama has directed agencies to lean strongly toward disclosure.
Frederick A. O. Schwarz Jr., who served as chief counsel for the Church Committee and has called for a new commission, said there is no telling what a thorough investigation may turn up. He recalled his shock as he sat in a secure room at the C.I.A. in 1975 and read that the agency had recruited the Mafia in a scheme to kill Fidel Castro.
“It may seem that we already know a lot,” Mr. Schwarz said. “But based on my experience, I’m certain there’s a lot that went on the last eight years that we still don’t know.”

Monday, February 23, 2009

Putting peace first

Christine Ahn and Paul Liem at Berkeley argue it is essential to put peace first in dealing with the North Korea by pointing out it was recessive to have a "you do it first, then we would move" policy during the Bush administration compared to "let's do it together" stance of Clinton administration. However, the authors express their concerns on what shown by Hilary Clinton during her current visit to Asian nations rather resembles to the Bush's.

Obama government's stance on the Korean peninsula attracts very much attention within/outside the nation, and many experts are pouring out perspectives based on their own agendas and experiences. Whatever that may be, what we shouldn't forget is, as Ahm and Liem argued, to put peace first.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Christine Ahn and Paul Liem
Thursday, February 19, 2009
'If North Korea is genuinely prepared to completely and verifiably eliminate their nuclear weapons program," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said before she departed for Asia, "the Obama administration will be willing to normalize bilateral relations, replace the peninsula's longstanding armistice agreements with a permanent peace treaty, and assist in meeting the energy and other economic needs of the North Korean people."
Clinton's acknowledgment of the need to replace the armistice with a permanent peace treaty is a warm welcome to millions of Korean-Americans and Koreans hoping for a peaceful resolution to heightening tensions on the peninsula.
During her stop in Japan, however, she appeared to adopt the Bush administration's position that North Korea disarm as a precondition for normalization. Warning that a North Korean missile test would be "unhelpful" in moving relations with the U.S. forward, Clinton also stated, "If North Korea abides by the obligations it has already entered into and verifiably and completely eliminates its nuclear program, then there will be a reciprocal response certainly from the United States."
In the West, the conventional wisdom is that North Korea engages in "provocative" activity like missile testing in order to blackmail the United States into negotiations. What is forgotten, however, is that in the absence of an ongoing peace dialogue, the status quo between the United States and North Korea is that of two countries at war, held at bay only by a fragile truce.
For this reason, North Korea, as well as the United States and South Korea, routinely engage in war exercises and pursue modernization of their military technologies. In fact, the United States has committed to spending $10 billion on base construction in South Korea, and South Korea has begun to increase its military budget annually by 10 percent under its $665 billion Defense Reform 2020 Initiative.
For nearly eight years, the Bush administration threatened North Korea with dire consequences for not acquiescing to demands that it disarm its nuclear weapons program before receiving the benefits of U.S. friendship. As a result, not only did the North continue testing its missiles - it also tested a nuclear weapon in 2006. Today, whether the international community likes it or not, North Korea is a nuclear power.
But there is an alternative. A decade ago, North Korea agreed to a moratorium on its missile testing, and continued to mothball its plutonium reactor under an earlier agreed framework, as a result of a peace initiative launched during the Clinton administration. In this instance both countries agreed to take the first step toward peace together, not one before the other.
The Obama administration has a plateful of domestic and international crises before it. Fortunately, in the case of North Korea, there is a wealth of experience and lessons. The foremost of these is that while the "you disarm first" approach of the Bush administration proved to be disastrous, the "let's do this together" approach of the Clinton administration achieved positive results.
Failure to heed this hard-learned lesson, by an administration that pledged to pursue diplomacy over bluster and war, would be tragic.
Denuclearization of North Korea is still possible. But in the absence of a common commitment to peace secured by a permanent peace treaty, it is unlikely to occur.
James Laney, a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea, recently advised: "A peace treaty would provide a baseline for relationships, eliminating the question of the other's legitimacy and its right to exist. Absent such a peace treaty, every dispute presents afresh the question of the other side's legitimacy."
Let's dare to put peace first, for a change.
Christine Ahn is a fellow and Paul Liem is Chairman of the Korea Policy Institute.

Monday, February 16, 2009

κΉ€μˆ˜ν™˜ μΆ”κΈ°κ²½ μ„ μ’…; Cardinal Stephen Kim, 86, South Korea democracy advocate, dies

Reuters
Monday, February 16, 2009
SEOUL: The first South Korean Roman Catholic cardinal, Stephen Kim, who used his pulpit as a platform to help bring down the country's authoritarian leaders and instill democracy, died Monday at the age of 86, a church official said.
The cardinal, also known as Kim Sou Hwan, was a staunch advocate of human rights and one of the key figures in bringing democracy to a country where military strongmen ruled for decades.
Kim became a cardinal in 1968 and expanded the Catholic Church in South Korea by appealing to students, workers and the educated.
"He expressed his deep interest and grave concern for the repressed and the underprivileged and did not hesitate to speak out on the oppressive political situation," according to his biography on his personal Web site.
Kim became an international figure in 1986 and 1987, when tens of thousands of South Koreans took to the streets in rallies calling for the end of military rule and the start of free elections.
His red brick cathedral in central Seoul became a rallying point for protests. Kim, who gave refuge to protesters sought by the police, called on the president at the time, Chun Doo Hwan, to allow for the country's first open presidential elections.
"He awakened the values of human rights and social justice in the South Korean society, guiding the nation towards democratization," said Ro Kil Myung, an expert on religion and a sociology professor at Korea University.
For many in South Korea, Kim was the moral conscience of the struggle.
"He was not politically motivated in spearheading the democracy movement," Ro said. "His actions were rather based on the spirit of Catholicism."
Kim delivered stinging sermons from his pulpit calling for democracy while the opposition leaders Kim Dae Jung and Kim Young Sam, who would both later become president, sat in front rows.
After the democracy struggles that resulted in South Korea's first open presidential election in 1987, Kim fought for better human rights protections for migrant foreign workers and for Japan to take greater responsibility for the damage it caused during its 1910-1945 colonial rule over Korea.
The number of Catholics in South Korea increased more than sixfold while Kim was cardinal, reaching 5.1 million in 2005 among a population of about 49 million, according to government figures.
Correction:
Notes:

Copyright © 2009 The International Herald Tribune www.iht.com
var iht_dcsid = "dcs7ca2og10000woszoz47ro5_2r5u";


(2보)(μ„œμšΈ=μ—°ν•©λ‰΄μŠ€) μ •μ²œκΈ° 기자 = ν•œκ΅­ 가톨릭계λ₯Ό λŒ€ν‘œν•˜λŠ” 인물이자 정신적 μ§€μ£Ό 역할을 ν•΄μ˜¨ κΉ€μˆ˜ν™˜ 좔기경이 16일 μ˜€ν›„ 6μ‹œ12λΆ„κ»˜ 강남성λͺ¨λ³‘μ›μ—μ„œ μ„ μ’…(ε–„η΅‚γ†μ„œκ±°λ₯Ό λœ»ν•˜λŠ” 천주ꡐ μš©μ–΄)ν–ˆλ‹€. ν–₯λ…„ 87μ„Έ. 1922λ…„ 5μ›” λŒ€κ΅¬μ—μ„œ μΆœμƒν•œ 고인은 1951λ…„ μ‚¬μ œν’ˆμ„ λ°›μ•˜κ³  1966λ…„ μ΄ˆλŒ€ λ§ˆμ‚°κ΅κ΅¬μž₯을 거쳐 1968λ…„ λŒ€μ£Όκ΅λ‘œ μŠΉν’ˆν•œ λ’€ μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ΅κ΅¬μž₯에 μ˜¬λžλ‹€. 1969λ…„ ꡐ황 λ°”μ˜€λ‘œ 6세에 μ˜ν•΄ ν•œκ΅­μΈ 졜초 μΆ”κΈ°κ²½μœΌλ‘œ μ„œμž„λœ 고인은 천주ꡐ 주ꡐ회의 의μž₯, μ•„μ‹œμ•„ 천주ꡐ 주ꡐ회의 ꡬ성 μ€€λΉ„μœ„μ›μž₯ 등을 μ—­μž„ν•œ λ’€ 1998λ…„ μ •λ…„(75μ„Έ)을 λ„˜κΈ°λ©΄μ„œ μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ΅κ΅¬μž₯μ—μ„œ μ€ν‡΄ν–ˆλ‹€.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Statement by Historians in South Korea and Overseas Signatories to the Statement (November 10, 2008) South Korea

μ „κ΅­ 및 ν•΄μ™Έ μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μž μ„ μ–Έ

방기쀑(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 강길쀑(κ²½μƒλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ°•λŒ€λ―Ό(κ²½μ„±λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ°•λͺ…κΈΈ(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) 강문석(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ³ λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) κ°•λ―Έμž(κ²½μ„±λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) κ°•λ―Όμ² (κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 석사과정) 강병식(μ—­μ‚¬μ‹€ν•™νšŒ 회μž₯) 강봉룑(λͺ©ν¬λŒ€ ꡐ수) 강봉원(κ²½μ£ΌλŒ€ λ¬Έν™”μž¬ν•™λΆ€) κ°•μ„±κΈΈ(κ΄‘μ–‘μ œμ² κ³  ꡐ사) 강성봉(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 박사과정) κ°•μ„±ν˜Έ(μˆœμ²œλŒ€ 인문학뢀 ꡐ수) κ°•μ˜κ²½(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€) κ°•μΌνœ΄(μˆ˜μ›λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ°•μž¬κ΄‘(κ²½κΈ°λŒ€ 사학과 강사) κ°•μ •μˆ™(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 박사과정) 강정원(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) κ°•νŒκΆŒ(계λͺ…λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ°•ν˜œκ²½(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ꡐ수) κ°•ν˜œλΌ(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡭ사학과) κ°•ν˜Έμ„ (μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 λŒ€ν•™μ›) κ°•νš¨μˆ™(μ§„μ‹€ν™”ν•΄μœ„μ›νšŒ) κ³ λ™ν™˜(ν•œκ΅­κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ μ› μΈλ¬Έμ‚¬νšŒκ³Όν•™λΆ€ ꡐ수) κ³ μ˜μ§„(κ΄‘μ£ΌλŒ€ ꡐ수) 고원(κ²½ν¬λŒ€) κ³ μ •νœ΄(ν¬ν•­κ³΅λŒ€ μΈλ¬Έμ‚¬νšŒν•™λΆ€ ꡐ수) κ³ μ§€ν›ˆ(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) κ³ ν˜„μ•„(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€) κ³½μ°¨μ„­(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ΅¬λ•νšŒ(κ³ μ²™κ³  ꡐ사) κ΅¬λ„μ˜(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ 쀑세사2λΆ„κ³Ό) ꡬ만μ˜₯(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ΅¬μ‚°μš°(μ°½μ›λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κ΅¬μ™„νšŒ(μ„Έλͺ…λŒ€ ꡐ수) ꢌ기철(λΆ€μ‚°μ™ΈλŒ€ κ²½μ œν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΆŒλ‚΄ν˜„(κ³ λ €λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΆŒλ•μ˜(λΆ€μ‚°μ™ΈλŒ€ ꡐ수) κΆŒμ—°μ›…(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ꢌ영ꡭ(μˆ­μ‹€λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ꢌ영배(계성쀑 ꡐ사) ꢌ영였(λŒ€μ €μ€‘ν•™κ΅) ꢌ였영(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΆŒμ˜€μ€‘(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과) κΆŒμ€μ£Ό(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과) ꢌ인혁(μ œμ£ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΆŒνƒœμ–΅(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) κΈ°κ²½λŸ‰(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) κΈ°κ΄‘μ„œ(μ‘°μ„ λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€κ±΄νƒœ(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ› ꡐ수) 김경남(ν•™μŠ΅μ›λŒ€ν•™ 연ꡬ원) κΉ€κ²½λž€(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λŒ€λ™λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ› μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€κ²½λž˜(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과) κΉ€κ²½μ˜₯(λͺ©ν¬λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 김경일(ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ€‘μ•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› ꡐ수) κΉ€κ΄‘μ² (λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 김기봉(κ²½κΈ°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€κΈ°μ„­(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€κΈ°μŠΉ(순천ν–₯λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€κΈ°μ£Ό(ν˜Έλ‚¨μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ ꡐ수) 김남석(μΆ©λ‚¨ν˜Έμ„œκ³ ) 김남섭(μ„œμšΈμ‚°μ—…λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€λ‚¨μœ€(μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) κΉ€λŒ€λž˜(μ‹ λΌλŒ€ κ²½μ œν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€λ„ν˜•(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€λ„ν›ˆ(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€) κΉ€λˆ(μ„œμšΈμ‚°μ—…λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€λ™μˆ˜(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 김동전(μ œμ£ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 김동진(ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό 강사) 김동철(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€λ‘ν˜„(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) 김락기(μΈν•˜λŒ€ 사학과 강사) κΉ€λͺ…μ§„(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 강사) 김무진(계λͺ…λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€λ¬ΈκΈ°(λΆ€κ²½λŒ€ 사학과) 김문식(λ‹¨κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€λ―Έμ—½(μ„±μ‹ μ—¬λŒ€ μΈλ¬Έκ³Όν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) κΉ€λ―Έν˜„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 박사과정) 김민석(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) κΉ€λ―Όμ² (λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) κΉ€λ°°μ² (μ²­μ£Όκ΅λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€λ°±μ² (μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) κΉ€λ³‘μš°(λŒ€κ΅¬ν•œμ˜λŒ€) κΉ€λ³΄μ˜(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 강사) 김봉렬(κ²½λ‚¨λŒ€ 인문학뢀 ꡐ수) κΉ€μ„ κ²½(μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) κΉ€μ„ λ―Έ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) κΉ€μ„ ν˜Έ(ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ€‘μ•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› 박사과정) 김성보(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€μ„±μš°(λŒ€κ΅¬ν•œμ˜λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€μ„±μ€€(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) 김세봉(λ‹¨κ΅­λŒ€ λ™μ–‘ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) κΉ€μ†Œλ‚¨(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ ν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) κΉ€μˆ˜ν˜„(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) κΉ€μˆœλ•(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각 μ„ μž„μ—°κ΅¬μ›) κΉ€μˆœμž(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ ν•™μˆ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€μŠΉ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 강사) κΉ€μŠΉνƒœ(λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μ—°κ΅¬μœ„μ›) κΉ€μ‹œν™©(κ²½λΆλŒ€ ν•œλ¬Έν•™κ³Ό λͺ…μ˜ˆκ΅μˆ˜) 김연희(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) κΉ€μ˜λ―Έ(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€μΌλ³Έν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) κΉ€μ˜λ―Έ(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€ 사학전곡 ꡐ수) κΉ€μ˜λ²”(λŒ€κ΅¬λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€μ˜μ§„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) κΉ€μ˜ν¬(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡭ학연ꡬ원) κΉ€μš©μ„ (ν•œλ¦ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€μš©ν (μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡭ학연ꡬ원 μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€μš°νƒ(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 박사과정) κΉ€μ›…ν˜Έ(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ μ„œμšΈν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μˆ˜μ„μ—°κ΅¬μ›) κΉ€μœ€κ²½(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ μ„œμ–‘μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό 강사) 김은경(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€) κΉ€μ€μˆ™(ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€μ˜ν™˜(μΆ©λΆλŒ€) κΉ€μ΅ν•œ(λͺ…μ§€λŒ€ κΈ°λ‘μ •λ³΄κ³Όν•™μ „λ¬ΈλŒ€ν•™μ› ꡐ수) 김인걸(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) κΉ€μΈν˜Έ(κ΄‘μš΄λŒ€ ꡐ양학뢀 ꡐ수) κΉ€μΈν˜Έ(ν•œμ–‘μ‚¬μ΄λ²„λŒ€ ꡐ수) κΉ€μž¬μ›…(κ³ λ €λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) κΉ€μ •μˆ™(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) 김정인(μΆ˜μ²œκ΅λŒ€ ꡐ수) 김쒅은(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) κΉ€μ’…μ€€(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각 μ„ μž„μ—°κ΅¬μ›) κΉ€μ£Όλž€(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과) κΉ€μ£Όμ˜(독립기념관 ν•œκ΅­λ…λ¦½μš΄λ™μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) κΉ€μ£Όμ™„(ν•œκ΅­μ œλ…Έμ‚¬μ΄λ“œμ—°κ΅¬νšŒ) κΉ€μ€€ν˜(μ€‘μ•™λŒ€ 강사) κΉ€μ€€ν˜•(κ²½μƒλŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€μ§€μˆ˜(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 법학과 λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€μ§€μ—°(ꡭ립쀑앙박물관) κΉ€μ§€μ˜(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό 박사과정) 김지희(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό 박사과정) κΉ€μ§„μ˜(λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) κΉ€μ§„ν•œ(ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ€‘μ•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› 박사과정) 김창둝(κ²½λΆλŒ€ λ²•κ³ΌλŒ€ν•™ ꡐ수) κΉ€μΆ©ν˜„(μΆ©λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과) κΉ€νƒœμ˜(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 사학과 λͺ…μ˜ˆκ΅μˆ˜) κΉ€νƒœμš°(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ 강사) κΉ€νƒœμ›…(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€ν•œμ’…(ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€ν•­κΈ°(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 석사과정) κΉ€ν˜„μˆ™(λ™λΆμ•„μ—­μ‚¬μž¬λ‹¨ μ—°κ΅¬μœ„μ›) κΉ€ν˜•κ΅­(포항해양과학고) κΉ€ν˜•μˆ˜(ν•œκ΅­κ΅­ν•™μ§„ν₯원) κΉ€ν˜Έλ²”(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ κ²½μ œν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) κΉ€ν›ˆμ‹(μΈμ œλŒ€ 역사고고학과 ꡐ수) 김희곀(μ•ˆλ™λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 김희ꡐ(κ΄‘μš΄λŒ€ ꡐ수) 김희선(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 강사) λ‚˜μ• μž(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ·ΌλŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) λ‚˜ν¬λΌ(μ§„μ£Όμ‚°μ—…λŒ€ ꡐ양학뢀 ꡐ수) λ‚¨κΈ°ν˜„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) 남동신(λ•μ„±μ—¬λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 남무희(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€) 남미전(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과) λ‚¨μž¬μš°(μ°½μ›λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 남쒅ꡭ(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ‚¨μ§€λŒ€(μ„œμ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ‚¨μ² ν˜Έ(λŒ€κ΅¬μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ) λ…Έλͺ…ν™˜(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ…Έμ˜κΈ°(μ‘°μ„ λŒ€) 노쀑ꡭ(계λͺ…λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ„λ©΄νšŒ(λŒ€μ „λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) λ„ν˜„μ² (μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡐ수) λΌμ •μˆ™(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) λ₯˜μŠΉλ ¬(κ°•μ›λŒ€ ꡐ수) λ₯˜μ˜μ² (μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ 강사) λ₯˜μ€ν•˜(μ˜μ‚°λŒ€ μ‹œκ°„κ°•μ‚¬) λ₯˜μ€€λ²”(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) λ₯˜ν•œμˆ˜(상λͺ…λŒ€ ꡐ수) λ₯˜ν˜„희(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ³ λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) λ¬Έμˆ˜ν˜„(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 인문학연ꡬ원 μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 문영주(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) λ¬Έμš©μ‹(κ³ λ €λŒ€ 강사) 문용호(μ–‘μ‚°μ œμΌκ³ ) 문쀑양(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) 문창둜(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 민덕기(μ²­μ£ΌλŒ€ 역사문화 ꡐ수) 민유기(κ΄‘μš΄λŒ€ ꡐ양학뢀 쑰ꡐ수) 박건주(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 강사) λ°•κ±Έμˆœ(μΆ©λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•κ²½μˆ˜(κ°•λ¦‰λŒ€ 일본학과 ꡐ수) λ°•κ΄‘λͺ…(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 석사과정) λ°•κ΄‘μ—°(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ 쀑세사1λΆ„κ³Ό) λ°•λŒ€μž¬(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°•λ§Œκ·œ(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°•λ§Ήμˆ˜(μ›κ΄‘λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 박상철(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ„ μ• (동λͺ…λŒ€ ꡐ수) λ°•μ„±μ€€(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) λ°•μˆ˜ν˜„(λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) λ°•μˆœμ€€(λ™μ˜λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μš°λ£‘(μ„œκ°•λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) λ°•μ›μš©(λΆ€κ²½λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 박원홍(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό) λ°•μœ λ―Έ(상λͺ…λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) λ°•μœ€μ„ (μƒν•΄λ³΅λ‹¨λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ—°κ΅¬μ€‘μ‹¬) λ°•μœ€μž¬(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 박은경(λ™μ•„λŒ€ κ³ κ³ λ―Έμˆ μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) 박은경(λ™μ•„λŒ€ κ³ κ³ λ―Έμˆ μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°•μ€μˆ™(μ„œμšΈμ‹œμ‚¬νŽΈμ°¬μœ„μ›νšŒ) λ°•μ •μ• (μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ 사학과) λ°•μ’…κΈ°(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ’…λ¦°(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ› μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) λ°•μ’…μ§„(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°•μ€€μ„±(μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) λ°•μ€€ν˜•(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ³ λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) λ°•μ§€μ˜(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 석사) λ°•μ§„λΉˆ(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ§„μš°(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ 일본학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ§„νƒœ(λŒ€μ§„λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수)λ°•μ§„ν›ˆ(λͺ…μ§€λŒ€ 사학과 쑰ꡐ수) 박진희(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ ν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) λ°•μ°¬κ·œ(λ‹¨κ΅­λŒ€ λ™μ–‘ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) λ°•μ°¬λ¬Έ(μ œμ£ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ°¬μŠΉ(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•μ°¬ν₯(κ³ λ €λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) λ°•μ²œμˆ˜(κ²½λΆλŒ€ ꡐ수) λ°•μ² ν•˜(μˆ­μ‹€λŒ€ 강사) λ°•νƒœκ· (μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡐ수) 박평식(μ²­μ£Όκ΅λŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒκ³Όκ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°•ν˜„μˆœ(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) λ°•ν˜Έμ„±(μ„œκ°•λŒ€ ꡐ수) λ°•ν™”μ§„(λΆ€κ²½λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•ν™˜(μˆ˜μ›λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) λ°•ν₯식(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ μ„œμ–‘μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) λ°˜λ³‘λ₯ (ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 방지원(μ‹ λΌλŒ€ ꡐ수) λ°°λ³‘μš±(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 강사) λ°°μ„λ§Œ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) 배영순(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) 배은아(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€) 백길남(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 석사쑸업) 백승μ˜₯(λΆ€μ‚°κ²½λ‚¨μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ) 백승철(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡭ학연ꡬ원 ꡐ수) 백영미 λ°±μ˜μ„œ(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 변광석(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 강사) 변동λͺ…(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ μ΄μˆœμ‹ ν•΄μ–‘λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) 변정심(λŒ€κ΅¬κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό μ™Έλž˜κ°•μ‚¬) μ„œλͺ…일(κ³ λ €λŒ€ λ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) μ„œμ˜κ±΄(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) μ„œμΈμ›(ν•œμ„±λŒ€ 강사) μ„œμ •λ³΅(μΆ©λ‚¨λŒ€ λͺ…μ˜ˆκ΅μˆ˜) μ„œμ •ν›ˆ(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) μ„œμ’…νƒœ(ν˜Έλ‚¨κ΅νšŒμ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ싀μž₯) μ„œμ€‘μ„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ„±λ°±μš©(ν•œλ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ†Œν˜„μˆ™(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€) μ†λ™μœ (ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ·ΌλŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) μ†λ³‘κ·œ(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ› HKꡐ수) μ†μŠΉνšŒ(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 손정미(λŒ€κ°€μ•Όλ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) 손철배(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ›) μ†‘κ·œλ²”(μ„œμ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ†‘μš©λ•(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과) 솑웅섭(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각 연ꡬ원) 솑찬섭(λ°©μ†‘λŒ€ 문화ꡐ양학과 ꡐ수) μ†‘ν˜Έμƒ(계λͺ…λŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ†‘ν˜Έμ •(ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ‹ κ²½μ² (λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ κ³ κ³ ν•™κ³Ό) μ‹ λ™ν•˜(λ™λ•μ—¬λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 전곡) μ‹ λ―Όμ² (μ„œμšΈλŒ€ 과학사및과학철학 박사과정) 신세라(λͺ¨μŠ€ν¬λ°”κ΅­λ¦½λŒ€ 역사학뢀 박사과정) μ‹ μˆœμ² (μ›κ΄‘λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ‹ μ•ˆμ‹(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ λ‹€λ¬Έν™”ν†΅ν•©μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ‹ μ˜ν¬(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) μ‹ μ€μ œ(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ‹ μ£Όλ°±(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) μ‹ νƒœκ°‘(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ‹¬μž¬μ„(λ°©μ†‘λŒ€ 강사) μ‹¬μž¬μš°(ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ€‘μ•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› ꡐ수) μ‹¬μž¬ν›ˆ(λ‹¨κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 심철기(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) μ•ˆλ³‘μš°(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μ•ˆν™˜(λΆ€μ‚°κ²½λ‚¨μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ) μ–‘λͺ…μˆ˜(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€) μ–‘λ―Έμˆ™(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 강사) 양상진(삼괴쀑) μ–‘μƒν˜„(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) 양정심(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€) μ–‘μ •ν˜„(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ–‘ν₯μˆ™(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ—¬ν˜Έκ·œ(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€ 사학과 λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) μ—°κ°‘μˆ˜(μ„œμšΈμ—­μ‚¬λ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) μ—Όλ³΅κ·œ(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μ—Όμš΄μ˜₯(κ³ λ €λŒ€) μ—Όμ •μ„­(μ „λΆλŒ€ HKꡐ수) μ˜ˆλŒ€μ—΄(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό 박사과정) 였보경(μΆ©λ‚¨λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 석사과정) μ˜€λΆ€μœ€(μΈλ•λŒ€ ꡐ수) 였수창(ν•œλ¦ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 였영ꡐ(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) μ˜€μΈνƒ(λΆ€μ‚°κ΅λŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒκ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ˜€μ •μš°(κ΄‘μ£Όμ—¬λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ˜€μ œμ—°(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 λŒ€ν•™μ›) μ˜€μ’…λ‘(μ„±μ‹ μ—¬λŒ€ 사학과 λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) μ˜€ν•­λ…•(μΆ©λΆλŒ€) 였ν₯식(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 μ‹œκ°„κ°•μ‚¬) μ™•ν˜„μ’…(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) 우인수(κ²½λΆλŒ€ ꡐ수) μ›μ˜λ―Έ(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 강사) μœ„μ€μˆ™(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) 유경순(μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μœ μŠΉμ›(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡐ수) 유승희(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ HKꡐ수) 유영μ˜₯(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ μΈλ¬Έν•œκ΅­ HKμ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 유μž₯κ·Ό(κ²½λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡐ수) 유재건(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μœ ν˜„(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과) μœ ν˜„κ²½(κ³ λ Ήκ΅° λŒ€κ°€μ•Όλ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) μœ ν˜„μž¬(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) 윀경둜(ν•œμ„±λŒ€ 총μž₯) μœ€κ²½μ§„(κ²½μƒλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μœ€λŒ€μ›(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각 μ±…μž„μ—°κ΅¬μ›) μœ€λ•μ˜(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μœ€μ‹œμ›(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 석사과정) 윀용좜(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) 윀용혁(κ³΅μ£ΌλŒ€ ꡐ수) μœ€μ›μ˜(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 사학과) μœ€μž¬μ„(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μœ€μ§€ν˜„(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과) μ€μ •νƒœ(λŒ€λ¦ΌλŒ€ 강사) μ΄κ°•λž˜(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄κ°•ν•œ(μΈν•˜λŒ€ BK21사업단) μ΄κ°œμ„(κ²½λΆλŒ€μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) 이경ꡬ(μ „λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이경ꡬ(ν•œλ¦ΌλŒ€ ν•œλ¦Όκ³Όν•™μ› HKμ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 이경미(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) μ΄κ΄‘μˆ˜(λΆ€μ‚°μ™ΈλŒ€ λŸ¬μ‹œμ•„μΈλ„ν†΅μƒν•™λΆ€ ꡐ수) μ΄κ΄‘μš±(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 강사) 이규철(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡭ사학과) 이기영(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄κΈ°ν›ˆ(λͺ©ν¬λŒ€ 역사문화학뢀 ꡐ수) 이동인(μž„μ›κ²½μ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ΄λ™ν—Œ(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 강사) 이λͺ…μ„ (μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ 석사과정) 이λͺ…μˆ™(κ²½ν¬λŒ€) 이문기(κ²½λΆλŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) 이민아(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 λŒ€ν•™μ›) 이병둀(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€) μ΄λ³‘νœ΄(κ²½λΆλŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό λͺ…μ˜ˆκ΅μˆ˜) 이병희(ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) 이상길(κ²½λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ΄μƒμ˜(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡭ학연ꡬ원) 이상찬(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡐ수) μ΄μ„κ·œ(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이선아(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) μ΄μ„±μž„(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각 연ꡬ원) 이성주(κ°•λ¦‰λŒ€ 사학과 λΆ€κ΅μˆ˜) μ΄μ„±ν™˜(계λͺ…λŒ€ 일본학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μ„Έμ˜(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μ†‘μˆœ(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ·ΌλŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) 이솑희(μ‹ λΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μˆ˜μ›(λ―Όμ£Όν™”μš΄λ™κΈ°λ…μ‚¬μ—…νšŒ) μ΄μˆ˜ν™˜(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) 이승렬(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과) 이승민(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›μƒ) 이승민(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 강사) 이신철(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ΄μ• μˆ™(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 박사과정) μ΄μ˜μ„(κ΄‘μ£ΌλŒ€ μ™Έκ΅­μ–΄ν•™λΆ€ ꡐ수) μ΄μ˜μ• (경기도 λ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) μ΄μ˜ν•™(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€ ꡐ수) 이영호(μΈν•˜λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이용기(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ›) 이용재(μ „λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이용창(λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μ±…μž„μ—°κ΅¬μ›) μ΄μš°μ„(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ 쀑세사1λΆ„κ³Ό) 이욱(ν•œκ΅­κ΅­ν•™μ§„ν₯원) 이원배(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό κ³ λŒ€μ‚¬μ „κ³΅) μ΄μœ€κ°‘(계λͺ…λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μœ€μƒ(μ°½μ›λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μž„ν•˜(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€) 이정민(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 강사) μ΄μ •λΉˆ(κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 사학과) 이정선(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) μ΄μ •μˆ™(λΆ€μ‚°κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€) 이정신(ν•œλ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이정은(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ΄μ •ν˜Έ(κ³ λ €λŒ€ BK21ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ΅μœ‘μ—°κ΅¬λ‹¨) μ΄μ •ν›ˆ(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ 쀑세사1λΆ„κ³Ό) 이쒅범(μ‘°μ„ λŒ€ ꡐ수) 이쒅봉(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μ’…μ„œ(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μ£Όν˜„(ν•œλ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄μ£Όν™˜(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ ν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) 이쀀ꡬ(λŒ€κ΅¬ν•œμ˜λŒ€ ꡐ수) 이진λͺ¨(ν•œλ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 이진μ˜₯(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ΄μ§„ν•œ(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ΄νƒœν›ˆ(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 강사) 이필은(λ‚˜μ‚¬λ ›λŒ€) μ΄ν•™μˆ˜(λΆ€μ‚°κ²½λ‚¨μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ) μ΄ν•œμƒ(λŒ€μ „λŒ€ ꡐ수) 이항쀀(μ„œμšΈμ—¬λŒ€ 사학과) 이해쀀(κ³΅μ£ΌλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΄ν˜„μˆ™(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ›) μ΄ν˜„μ§„(μ„œμšΈλŒ€κ·œμž₯각) μ΄ν˜•μš°(μ˜λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡐ수) 이혜민(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 강사) 이혜μ˜₯(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€) 이호룑(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ ν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) μ΄ν™˜λ³‘(λ“±μ΄Œκ³  ꡐ사) μ΄νš¨ν˜•(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μž„κ²½μ„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μž„λ―Όν˜(μ—­μ‚¬μ‹€ν•™νšŒ 총무이사) μž„λ³‘ν›ˆ(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μž„μ„ ν™”(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 박사과정) μž„μ„ΈκΆŒ(μ•ˆλ™λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μž„μ†‘μž(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μž„ν•™μ„±(μΈν•˜λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ ꡐ수) μž„ν—Œμ˜(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μš΄μ˜μœ„μ›) μž„ν˜œλ ¨(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ 강사) μž₯λ™ν‘œ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μž₯λ―Έμ• (κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€) μž₯병인(μΆ©λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μž₯μ„ ν™”(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과) μž₯μ„±μ€€(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 석사과정) μž₯세룑(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ HKꡐ수) μž₯μ‹ (μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μž₯μ—°μ˜₯(계λͺ…λŒ€ν•™κ΅ ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› 방문ꡐ수) μž₯영민(μƒμ§€λŒ€ ꡐ수) μž₯μ˜μˆ™(상λͺ…λŒ€) μž₯μ€€μ² (μ›κ΄‘λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ „κ²½μˆ™(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ 박사) 전ꡭ역사ꡐ사λͺ¨μž„() μ „λ•μž¬(κ²½μ£ΌλŒ€ ꡐ양과정뢀 ꡐ수) μ „λͺ…ν˜(ν•œκ΅­μ™ΈλŒ€) μ „μ˜μ„­(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό 강사) μ „μ˜μš±(μ„œμšΈμ‹œλ¦½λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›μƒ) μ „μ˜μ€€(μ€‘μ•™λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ „μš°μš©(μ„œμšΈλŒ€λ³‘μ› 병원역사문화센터 ꡐ수) μ „μ œν˜„(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€ 박사과정) μ „μ§„μ„±(λΆ€μ‚°κ΅λŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒκ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ „ν˜„μˆ˜(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ „ν˜•νƒ(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ „ν˜Ένƒœ(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) 정동락(λŒ€κ°€μ•Όλ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) 정동쀀(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€BK21사업단 박사후연ꡬ원) μ •λ™ν›ˆ(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ›) μ •λ―Έμ„±(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 강사) 정병삼(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ •λ³‘μš±(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) 정성일(κ΄‘μ£Όμ—¬λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ •μˆ­κ΅(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ·ΌλŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) μ •μ—°νƒœ(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μ •μš”κ·Ό(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ λ‹€λ¬Έν™”ν†΅ν•©μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) μ •μš©μš±(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μ •μž¬ν›ˆ(κ²½μƒλŒ€ 사학과) μ •μž¬ν›ˆ(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ HK연ꡬ원) 정진상(κ²½μƒλŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ •μ§„μ•„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™μˆ μ› μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ •μ§„μ˜(μ•ˆλ™λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ •μ°½λ ¬(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ λͺ…μ˜ˆκ΅μˆ˜) μ •μ°½ν˜„(κ΅­λ―ΌλŒ€ ꡐ양과정뢀 κ²Έμž„κ΅μˆ˜) μ •νƒœν—Œ(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ •ν•™μˆ˜(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ λ‹€λ¬Έν™”ν†΅ν•©μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) 정해은(κ΅°μ‚¬νŽΈμ°¬μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ •ν˜„λ°±(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ ꡐ수) μ •ν˜Έν›ˆ(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ ꡭ학연ꡬ원) μ‘°κ²½μ² (μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ‘°κ΄‘(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ‘°κ·œνƒœ(ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±μš΄λ™μ‚¬ν•™νšŒ 연ꡬ이사) μ‘°λ‚™μ˜(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ 강사) μ‘°λͺ…κ·Ό(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) 쑰미은(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 박사과정) μ‘°λ³‘λ‘œ(κ²½κΈ°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ‘°μ„±μš΄(κ΅ν† λŒ€ν•™ μΈλ¬Έκ³Όν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ‘°μ„Έμ—΄(λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) μ‘°μ„Έν˜„(λΆ€κ²½λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 쑰승래(μ²­μ£ΌλŒ€ ꡐ수) μ‘°μ˜κ΄‘(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ‘°μ›λž˜(μˆœμ²œλŒ€ 사학전곡 ꡐ수) 쑰원μ˜₯(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 강사) μ‘°μœ€μ„ (μ²­μ£ΌλŒ€ ꡐ수) 쑰재곀(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ κ·ΌλŒ€μ‚¬λΆ„κ³Ό) 쑰쀀희(λŒ€μ’…κ΅) μ£Όκ²½λ―Έ(λΆ€κ²½λŒ€ μΈλ¬Έμ‚¬νšŒκ³Όν•™μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ£Όλͺ…μ² (ν•œκ΅­κ΅μ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ£Όμ›…μ˜(λŒ€κ΅¬κ΅μœ‘λŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒκ³Ό ꡐ수) 진상원(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과) 차미희(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€ μ‚¬νšŒμƒν™œκ³Ό ꡐ수) μ°¨μ„ ν˜œ(κ²½ν¬λŒ€) 차인배(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 강사) 차철욱(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­λ―Όμ‘±λ¬Έν™”μ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ) 채상식(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 채웅석(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œκ°‘μˆ˜(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ μ„œμ–‘μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) μ΅œκ²½μ„ (μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 석사쑸업) μ΅œλ•κ²½(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 졜보영(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ λŒ€ν•™μ› 사학과) μ΅œμ—°μ‹(λͺ©ν¬λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œμ—°μ£Ό(λ™μ˜λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œμ˜μ‹¬(κΉ€ν•΄μ™Έκ΅­μ–΄κ³ ) μ΅œμ˜νƒœ(μ „λ‚¨λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œμ›κ·œ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ ꡐ수) 졜윀였(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œμ€μ§„(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ 석사과정) 졜인기(ν•œκ΅­μ—­μ‚¬μ—°κ΅¬νšŒ 쀑세사2λΆ„κ³Ό) μ΅œμ§„κ·œ(μ‘°μ„ λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) μ΅œν•΄λ£‘(λŒ€κ΅¬μ²­μ†Œλ…„λŒ€μ•ˆκ΅μœ‘μ›) μ΅œν˜„λ―Έ(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 강사) 졜혜주(ν•œμ–‘λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) μ΅œν™μ‘°(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 강사) ν•˜μ„Έλ΄‰(ν•œκ΅­ν•΄μ–‘λŒ€ λ™μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν•˜μœ μ‹(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€) ν•˜μΌμ‹(μ—°μ„ΈλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ν•˜μ’…λ¬Έ(ν•œμ‹ λŒ€ 일본지역학과 ꡐ수) ν•˜μ§€μ˜(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과) ν•œλͺ…κ·Ό(μˆ­μ‹€λŒ€ λ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) ν•œλͺ…κΈ°(λͺ…μ§€λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ν•œλͺ¨λ‹ˆκΉŒ(κ°€ν†¨λ¦­λŒ€) ν•œλ¬Έμ’…(μ „λΆλŒ€ ꡐ수) ν•œλ΄‰μ„(μ„±κ· κ΄€λŒ€ 사학과 박사과정) ν•œμƒκΆŒ(λ•μ„±μ—¬λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ν•œμ„±λ―Ό(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ 사학과 강사) ν•œμ„±μš±(ν•œκ΅­λ¬Έν™”μœ μ‚°μ—°κ΅¬μ›) ν•œμŠΉν›ˆ(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό λ°•μ‚¬μˆ˜λ£Œ) ν•œμ‹œμ€€(λ‹¨κ΅­λŒ€ 역사학과 ꡐ수) ν•œμš΄μ„(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ꡐ수) ν•œμ •μˆ™(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ μ„œμ–‘μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν•œμ •ν›ˆ(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) ν•œμ°½κ· (ν•œλ‚¨λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν•œμ² ν˜Έ(λ™κ΅­λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν•œν™κ΅¬(μ„±κ³΅νšŒλŒ€ ꡐ수) ν•œν¬μˆ™(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν•¨μˆœμ„­(κ΅­λ¦½λŒ€κ΅¬λ°•λ¬Όκ΄€) ν—ˆμˆ˜(λ™λ•μ—¬λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) ν—ˆμ‹ ν˜œ(ν™μ΅λŒ€ 강사) ν—ˆμ˜λž€(μšΈμ‚°λŒ€ 역사문화학과 ꡐ수) ν—ˆμ›(μ„œμ›λŒ€ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν—ˆμ›μ˜(ν•œκ΅­ν•™μ€‘μ•™μ—°κ΅¬μ› μž₯μ„œκ° 연ꡬ원) ν—ˆμ€(κ³ λ €λŒ€ ν•œκ΅­μ‚¬ν•™κ³Ό ꡐ수) ν—ˆμ’…(μΆ©λ‚¨λŒ€ ꡭ사학과 ꡐ수) ν—ˆνƒœμš©(κ³ λ €λŒ€ 강사) ν˜„μž¬μ—΄(λΆ€μ‚°λŒ€ 사학과) ν˜„μ’…μ² (κ²½ν¬λŒ€ 박사과정) 홍문기(μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡭ사학과) 홍석λ₯ (μ„±μ‹ μ—¬λŒ€ 쑰ꡐ수) ν™μˆœκΆŒ(λ™μ•„λŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) ν™μˆœλ―Ό(λͺ…μ§€λŒ€ ꡐ수) ν™μ˜κΈ°(μˆœμ²œλŒ€ 인문학뢀 ꡐ수) ν™μ˜μ˜(μˆ™λͺ…μ—¬λŒ€ μ—°κ΅¬κ΅μˆ˜) 홍정완(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) 황병주(μ—­μ‚¬λ¬Έμ œμ—°κ΅¬μ†Œ 연ꡬ원) ν™©λ³΄μ˜μ‘°(κ²½λΆλŒ€ 사학과 ꡐ수) 황인정(μ΄ν™”μ—¬λŒ€ 사학과)

Overseas

Charles Armstrong, Professor, Columbia University
Donald Baker, Professor, University of British Columbia
Edward J. Baker, Professor, Hanyang University
Remco E. Breuker, Researcher, Leiden University
Mark Caprio, Professor, Rikkyo University
Edward Chang, Professor, University of California at Riverside
Kornel Chang, Professor, University of Connecticut
Hyaeweol Choi, Professor, Arizona State University
Jennifer Jihye Chun, Professor, University of British Columbia
Hye Seung Chung, Professor, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Michael Chwe, Professor, UCLA
Donald N. Clark, Professor, Trinity University
Nicole Cohen, Postdoctoral Fellow, Columbia University
Bruce Cumings, Professor, University of Chicago
Lisa Kim Davis, Professor, UCLA
Brett de Bary, Professor, Cornell University
Koen De Ceuster, Professor, Leiden University
John DiMoia, Professor, National University of Singapore
Jamie Doucette, Lecturer, University of British Columbia
Alexis Dudden, Professor, University of Connecticut
John Duncan, Professor, UCLA
Thomas Duvernay, Professor, Handong Global University
Carter J. Eckert, Professor, Harvard University
Marion Eggert, Professor, Ruhr University
Henry Em, Professor, Korea University
Stephen Epstein, Professor, Victoria University of Wellington
John Feffer, Editor, Foreign Policy in Focus
Norma Field, Professor, University of Chicago
Takashi Fujitani, Professor, University of California, San Diego
Mel Gurtov, Professor, University of Oregon
Dennis Hart, Professor, University of Pittsburgh
Martin Hart-Landsberg, Professor, Lewis and Clark College
Laura Hein, Professor, Northwestern University
Todd A. Henry, Professor, Colorado State University
Christine Hong, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of California, Berkeley
Theodore Hughes, Professor, Columbia University
Kyung Moon Hwang, Professor, University of Southern California
Sheila Miyoshi Jager, Professor, Oberlin College
Roger L. Janelli, Professor, Indiana University
Kelly Jeong, Professor, University of California, Riverside
Jennifer Jung-Kim, Editor, UCLA
George Kallander, Professor, Syracuse University
Namsoon Kang, Professor, Texas Christian University
Ken Kawashima, Professor, University of Toronto
Daniel Y. Kim, Professor, Brown University
Elaine Kim, Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Hyung-A Kim, Professor, Australian National University
Jina Kim, Professor, Smith College
Joy Kim, Professor, Princeton University
Jungwon Kim, Professor, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
Kyung Hyun Kim, Professor, University of California, Irvine
Sang-Hyun Kim, Postdoctoral Fellow, Harvard University
Sun-Chul Kim, Professor, Barnard College/Columbia University
Sun Joo Kim, Professor, Harvard University
Suzy Kim, Professor, Boston College
Taik Kyun Kim, Professor, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Thomas P. Kim, Professor, Scripps College
Youngnan Kim-Paik, Professor, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Ross King, Professor, University of British Columbia
Lev R. Kontsevich, Researcher, Russian Academy of Sciences
Hagen Koo, Professor, University of Hawaii at Manoa
J. Victor Koschmann, Professor, Cornell University
Tae Yang Kwak, Professor, Ramapo College of New Jersey
Nayoung Aimee Kwon, Professor, Duke University
Gari Ledyard, Professor, Columbia University
Eun-Jeung Lee, Professor, Free University Berlin
James Kyung-Jin Lee, Professor, University of California, Santa Barbara
Namhee Lee, Professor, UCLA
Timothy S. Lee, Professor, Texas Christian University
Walter K. Lew, Professor, University of Miami
John Lie, Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Ramsay Liem, Professor, Boston College
Richard D. McBride, Professor, Brigham Young University
Gavan McCormack, Professor, Australian National University
Yong Soon Min, Professor, University of California, Irvine
Seungsook Moon, Professor, Vassar College
Jane Myong, Professor, Sinclair Community College
Sung-Deuk Oak, Professor, UCLA
Robert Oppenheim, Professor, University of Texas, Austin
Hyung Il Pai, Professor, University of California, Santa Barbara
Gary Pak, Professor, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Albert L. Park, Professor, Claremont McKenna College
Andrew Sung Park, Professor, United Theological Seminary
Chan Park, Professor, Ohio State University
Eugene Y. Park, Professor, University of California, Irvine
Jin Young Park, Professor, American University
Pori Park, Professor, Arizona State University
Samuel Perry, Professor, Brown University
Michael J. Pettid, Professor, State University of New York at Binghamton
Leslie Pincus, Professor, University of Michigan
Janet Poole, Professor, University of Toronto
Jorge Rafael Di Masi, Professor, National University of La Plata
Michael E. Robinson, Professor, Indiana University
Lawrence Rogers, Professor, University of Hawaii at Hilo
Alfredo Romero Castilla, Professor, National University of Mexico
Youngju Ryu, Professor, University of Michigan
Naoki Sakai, Professor, Cornell University
Wesley Sasaki-Uemura, Professor, University of Utah
Werner Sasse, Professor, University of Hamburg
Andre Schmid, Professor, University of Toronto
Mark Selden, Professor, State University of New York at Binghamton
Jungmin Seo, Professor, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Gi-Wook Shin, Professor, Stanford University
Edward J. Shultz, Professor, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Tatiana Simbirtseva, Lecturer, Russian State University for the Humanities
Eric Sirotkin, Chair, National Lawyers Guild Korean Peace Project
Min Suh Son, Professor, Johns Hopkins University
Jesook Song, Professor, University of Toronto
Min Hyoung Song, Professor, Boston College
Jae-Jung Suh, Professor, SAIS-Johns Hopkins University
Serk Bae Suh, Professor, University of California, Irvine
Seung Hye Suh, Professor, Scripps College
Vladimir Tikhonov (Pak Noja), Professor, Oslo University
Jun Uchida, Professor, Stanford University
So Jung Um, Graduate Student, University of Michigan
Luc Walhain, Professor, St. Thomas University
Boudewijn Walraven, Professor, Leiden University
Kenneth Wells, Professor, Australian National University
Rob Wilson, Professor, University of California, Santa Cruz
Hyangsoon Yi, Professor, University of Georgia
Theodore Jun Yoo, Professor, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Kyoim Yun, Professor, University of Kansas
----------------------BEGIN-----------------
Sent by: Do Myoun-Hoi [To Myon-hoe], Chairperson, Organization of Korean Historians (Han’guk yoksa yon’guhoe)

Translated and forwarded by the Steering Committee, Alliance of Scholars Concerned about Korea (ASCK)

Statement by Historians in South Korea and OverseasWe [the undersigned] demand that the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology stop the revision of [high school] history textbooks, undermining the principle of political neutrality in education.

On October 8th, twenty one academic associations related to the field of history held a press conference, criticizing the government’s plan to revise modern Korean history textbooks [used in high schools].The following day, the Joint Committee for the Resolution of the History Textbook Issue, composed of 39 groups – including the National Association of History Teachers, National University Workers’ Union, and Asia Peace and History Education Network – also held a press conference in front of the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology.They did so because, instead of safeguarding political neutrality in education and respecting historical expertise, the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology has brought about a crisis in historical research and education. But the Ministry has refused to acknowledge such criticism/opposition, and continues to stick to its plans for revision.On October 15th, the Ministry announced that it would “pursue a balanced revision of textbooks by the end of November reflecting the academic and educational perspectives in a comprehensive manner” by utilizing the report submitted by the National Institute ofKorean History entitled “Review of modern Korean history textbooks and Proposed Guidelines for Narration” and the participation of the Association of Experts in History Education made up of teachers, educational professionals and professors.The textbooks that the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology plans to revise had already been reviewed in 2004, 2005 and 2006, and [in those reviews] were not judged to be “left-leaning.” If the revisions are carried out [only] because the new President, Lee Myung-bak, proposed such changes as part of his so-called policy of “normalization of textbooks,” will future administrations also revise textbooks whenever there is a change in government? If that were to happen, political neutrality in education will be undermined, and there will be a proliferation of research on modern Korean history that caters solely to the government in power.Moreover, the way the Ministry has pursued the revision of history textbooks does not conform to the Regulations concerning Textbooks. According to these regulations, the Ministry may order the authors or the publishers to revise the contents, and if such orders go unheeded, the Ministry may revoke its official approval or suspend publication and circulation of the textbooks within one year. But even in such cases, the regulations have no provisions for the direct revision of textbooks by the government [as the government threatens to do].The report submitted by the National Institute of Korean History did make note of 49 different revisions to be made in the textbooks to enhance validity and fairness, avoiding bias in historical interpretation, but did not provide detailed guidelines for the 257 different expressions deemed problematic by the Ministry.It is of grave concern that the current attempt to revise history textbooks appears to be driven by a specific political agenda to homogenize history textbooks, as demanded by the "New Right" and parts of the governing group.First, the Ministry’s revision of history textbooks, by allowing only one historical interpretation, prevents diverse interpretations, based on accumulated historical research,from being reflected in the textbooks. This suppression of diversity leads to the repression of academic freedom in research and publication.Second, the Ministry’s revisions will further narrow the range of historical interpretations that had been guaranteed to some extent under the textbook authorization system. This distortion of the textbook authorization system will result in the publication of authorized textbooks that are no different from the government authored textbooks that were published under the Yushin System. This will result in the infringement of history teachers’ right to teach, and students’ right to learn.Third, the homogenization of history education will undermine students’ creative and spontaneous learning and furthermore hamper the cultivation of open-ended and pluralistic thought necessary in the age of globalization.Because the Ministry’s attempt to revise history textbooks will inevitably lead to the erosion of academic freedom and political neutrality in education, we, the undersigned scholars of history, hereby launch a nation-wide signature campaign and make the following demands:1. The Ministry must respect the research findings of historians and guarantee political neutrality in education.1. The Ministry must listen to the voices of historians and drop its plan to revise history textbooks for political purposes.1. The Ministry must stop exerting unjust external pressure on the publishers and the writers of history textbooks.

μ „κ΅­ μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μž μ„ μ–Έκ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€λŠ” ꡐ윑의 μ •μΉ˜μ  쀑립성을 ν›Όμ†ν•˜λŠ” κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μž‘μ—…μ„ μ€‘λ‹¨ν•˜λΌ!μ§€λ‚œ 10μ›” 8일 μ „κ΅­μ˜ 21개 역사학 κ΄€λ ¨ ν•™νšŒλŠ” μ •λΆ€μ˜ ν•œκ΅­ κ·Όν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μ‹œλ„μ— λŒ€ν•΄ κ·Έ 뢀당함을 μ§€μ ν•˜λŠ” κΈ°μžνšŒκ²¬μ„ ν•œ λ°” μžˆλ‹€. μ΄νŠΏλ‚ μ—λŠ” 전ꡭ역사ꡐ사λͺ¨μž„ λ“± ꡐ사 단체와 μ „κ΅­λŒ€ν•™λ…Έλ™μ‘°ν•©, μ•„μ‹œμ•„ν‰ν™”μ™€μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘μ—°λŒ€ λ“± 39개 λ‹¨μ²΄λ‘œ κ΅¬μ„±λœ ‘κ΅κ³Όμ„œλ¬Έμ œ 해결을 μœ„ν•œ κ³΅λ™λŒ€μ±…μœ„μ›νšŒ’κ°€ κ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€ μ•žμ— λͺ¨μ—¬ 역사 κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μ‹œλ„λ₯Ό μ€‘λ‹¨ν•˜λΌλŠ” κΈ°μžνšŒκ²¬μ„ ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μ˜ 전문성을 μ‘΄μ€‘ν•˜κ³  ꡐ윑의 μ •μΉ˜μ  쀑립성을 보μž₯ν•΄μ•Ό ν•  κ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€κ°€ 였히렀 역사 연ꡬ와 ꡐ윑의 μœ„κΈ°λ₯Ό μ΄ˆλž˜ν•˜κ³  μžˆλ‹€κ³  νŒλ‹¨ν–ˆκΈ° λ•Œλ¬Έμ΄λ‹€.κ·ΈλŸΌμ—λ„ λΆˆκ΅¬ν•˜κ³  κ΅κ³ΌλΆ€λŠ” μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ μ›€μ§μž„μ— λŒ€ν•΄μ„œλŠ” λͺ¨λ₯΄μ‡ λ‘œ μΌκ΄€ν•˜κ³  제 갈 길만 κ°€κ³  μžˆλ‹€. 10μ›” 15일 κ΅­μ‚¬νŽΈμ°¬μœ„μ›νšŒλ‘œλΆ€ν„° μ œμΆœλ°›μ€ 「ν•œκ΅­κ·Όν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ κ²€ν†  및 μ„œμˆ λ°©ν–₯ μ œμ–Έ」μ΄λž€ λ³΄κ³ μ„œμ™€ ꡐ원․κ΅μœ‘μ „λ¬Έμ§․ꡐ수 λ“±μœΌλ‘œ κ΅¬μ„±ν•œ μ—­μ‚¬κ΅μœ‘μ „λ¬Έκ°€ν˜‘μ˜νšŒλž€ 쑰직을 ν™œμš©ν•˜μ—¬ 11μ›” λ§κΉŒμ§€ ‘ν•™μˆ μ ․ꡐ윑적 츑면을 μ’…ν•©μ μœΌλ‘œ λ°˜μ˜ν•œ κ· ν˜•μž‘νžŒ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ •․보완을 μΆ”μ§„’ν•˜κ² λ‹€κ³  ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€.그런데 ꡐ과뢀가 μˆ˜μ •․λ³΄μ™„ν•˜κ² λ‹€λŠ” ν˜„ν–‰ κ΅κ³Όμ„œλŠ” 이미 2004λ…„, 2005λ…„, 2006λ…„ μ„Έ 차둀에 걸쳐 ‘쒌편ν–₯’이 μ•„λ‹ˆλΌκ³  확인해 μ£Όμ—ˆλ˜ λ°”λ‘œ κ·Έ κ΅κ³Όμ„œμ΄λ‹€. μ •κΆŒμ΄ λ°”λ€Œκ³  이λͺ…λ°• λŒ€ν†΅λ Ήμ΄ ‘κ΅κ³Όμ„œ 정상화’λΌλŠ” λ―Έλͺ… ν•˜μ— μ—­μ‚¬κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μ˜μ§€λ₯Ό λ°ν˜”λ‹€κ³  ν•˜μ—¬ 이전에 λ‚΄λ Έλ˜ 결둠을 λ²ˆλ³΅ν•œλ‹€λ©΄, ν–₯ν›„ μ •κΆŒμ΄ λ‹€μ‹œ λ°”λ€” κ²½μš°μ—λ„ κ·Έ μ •κΆŒμ˜ μš”κ΅¬λŒ€λ‘œ κ΅κ³Όμ„œλ₯Ό μˆ˜μ •ν•  것인가? κ·Έλ ‡κ²Œ 될 경우 λŒ€ν•œλ―Όκ΅­μ—μ„œ ꡐ윑의 μ •μΉ˜μ  쀑립성은 보μž₯될 수 없을 것이며 ν•œκ΅­ κ·Όν˜„λŒ€μ‚¬ 연ꡬ λ˜ν•œ μ •κΆŒμ˜ μž…λ§›μ— λ§žλŠ” μ—°κ΅¬λ§Œ λ¬΄μ„±ν•΄μ§ˆ 것이닀.κ²Œλ‹€κ°€ ν˜„μž¬ ꡐ과뢀가 μΆ”μ§„ν•˜κ³  μžˆλŠ” κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • 방식은 「κ΅κ³Όμš©λ„μ„œμ—κ΄€ν•œκ·œμ •」에도 μ—†λŠ” λΆˆλ²•μ  ν–‰νƒœμ΄λ‹€. 동 λ²•λ Ήμ—λŠ” ꡐ과뢀가 μ €μž‘μž λ˜λŠ” λ°œν–‰μžμ—κ²Œ μˆ˜μ •μ„ λͺ…ν•˜κ³  이에 λΆˆλ³΅ν•  경우 κ²€μ • 합격을 μ·¨μ†Œν•˜κ±°λ‚˜ 1λ…„ 이내 λ°œν–‰μ„ μ •μ§€μ‹œν‚€λŠ” λ“±μ˜ 쑰치λ₯Ό μ·¨ν•  수 μžˆμ„ 뿐, 직ꢌ μˆ˜μ •μ΄λž€ 쑰항은 어디에도 μ—†λ‹€.ꡐ과뢀에 제좜된 κ΅­μ‚¬νŽΈμ°¬μœ„μ›νšŒμ˜ λ³΄κ³ μ„œμ—λ„ 역사 ν•΄μ„μ˜ 편ν–₯성을 ν”Όν•˜λ©΄μ„œ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ λ‚΄μš©μ˜ 타당성과 곡정성을 λ†’μ΄λŠ” 것이 ν•„μš”ν•˜λ‹€κ³  ν•˜μ—¬ 49개 ν•­μ˜ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μ„œμˆ  λ°©ν–₯을 μ œμ‹œν•˜μ˜€μ„ 뿐, ꡐ과뢀가 μš”μ²­ν•œ 257개 ν‘œν˜„μ— λŒ€ν•œ ꡬ체적인 μˆ˜μ • 지침이 μ—†λ‹€.κ²°κ΅­ κ΅κ³ΌλΆ€μ˜ μˆ˜μ • μ‹œλ„μ—λŠ” λ‰΄λΌμ΄νŠΈλΌλŠ” νŠΉμ • μ •νŒŒμ™€ μ§‘κΆŒ μ„Έλ ₯ μΌκ°μ—μ„œ μš”κ΅¬ν•˜λŠ” λŒ€λ‘œ κ΅κ³Όμ„œμ˜ λ‚΄μš©μ„ 획일적으둜 λ°”κΎΈκ² λ‹€λŠ” μ •μΉ˜μ  μ˜λ„κ°€ κΉ”λ € μžˆλ‹€κ³  보지 μ•Šμ„ 수 μ—†μœΌλ©°, μ΄λŠ” λ‹€μŒ λͺ‡ κ°€μ§€ μ μ—μ„œ μ‹¬νžˆ μš°λ €λœλ‹€.첫째, κ΅κ³ΌλΆ€μ˜ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μž‘μ—…μ€ 였직 ν•œ κ°€μ§€ 역사 ν•΄μ„λ§Œ μ„œμˆ ν•˜κ²Œ ν•¨μœΌλ‘œμ¨ κ·Έλ™μ•ˆ μΆ•μ λœ λ‹€μ–‘ν•œ 역사 연ꡬ μ„±κ³Όκ°€ κ΅κ³Όμ„œμ— 반영될 수 μ—†κ²Œ λ§Œλ“€ 것이닀. μ΄λŠ” κ³§ ν•™λ¬Έ 연ꡬ와 좜판의 자유λ₯Ό μ–΅μ••ν•˜λŠ” κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ΄ˆλž˜ν•  것이닀.λ‘˜μ§Έ, λΆˆμ™„μ „ν•˜λ‚˜λ§ˆ 검인정 κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μ œλ„μ—μ„œ 보μž₯λ˜μ—ˆλ˜ λ‹€μ–‘ν•œ 역사 ν•΄μ„μ˜ 폭이 쀄어듀고 κ²€μ •μ œλ„λ₯Ό μ™œκ³‘μ‹œμΌœ, μœ μ‹ μ²΄μ œν•˜μ˜ κ΅­μ • κ΅κ³Όμ„œμ™€ λ‹€λ¦„μ—†λŠ” 검인정 κ΅κ³Όμ„œλ₯Ό μ–‘μ‚°ν•˜κ²Œ 될 것이며, μ΄λŠ” 역사 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐꢌ과 ν•™μƒλ“€μ˜ ν•™μŠ΅κΆŒμ„ μΉ¨ν•΄ν•˜λŠ” κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό 낳을 것이닀.μ…‹μ§Έ, 획일적인 역사 κ΅μœ‘μ€ ν•™μƒλ“€μ˜ 창의적이고 주도적인 ν•™μŠ΅μ„ μ €ν•΄ν•˜κ³  λ‚˜μ•„κ°€μ„œ κ΅­μ œν™” μ‹œλŒ€μ— ν•„μš”ν•œ 개방적이고 닀원적인 사고 λŠ₯λ ₯ 양성에 치λͺ…적인 λ…μ†Œ μž‘μš©μ„ ν•  것이닀.μš”μ»¨λŒ€, κ΅κ³ΌλΆ€μ˜ κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μ‹œλ„λŠ” ν•™λ¬Έμ˜ μžμœ μ™€ ꡐ윑의 μ •μΉ˜μ  쀑립성을 훼손할 것이 틀림없기에 우리 μ—­μ‚¬ν•™μžλ“€μ€ λ‹€μ‹œκΈˆ ꡐ과뢀에 λ‹€μŒκ³Ό 같은 μš”κ΅¬λ₯Ό μ œμΆœν•˜λ©°, 우리의 μ •λ‹Ήν•œ μ˜μ‚¬λ₯Ό κ΄€μ² ν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•˜μ—¬ 전ꡭ적인 μ„œλͺ… μš΄λ™μ— λŒμž…ν•˜λŠ” 바이닀.1. κ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€λŠ” μ—­μ‚¬ν•™κ³„μ˜ 연ꡬ μ„±κ³Όλ₯Ό μ‘΄μ€‘ν•˜κ³  ꡐ윑의 μ •μΉ˜μ  쀑립성을 보μž₯ν•˜λΌ!1. κ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€λŠ” μ—­μ‚¬ν•™κ³„μ˜ λͺ©μ†Œλ¦¬λ₯Ό κ²Έν—ˆνžˆ μˆ˜μš©ν•˜μ—¬ ν˜„μž¬ μ •μΉ˜μ μΈ λͺ©μ  ν•˜μ— μ§„ν–‰ν•˜κ³  μžˆλŠ” κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μˆ˜μ • μž‘μ—…μ„ μ€‘λ‹¨ν•˜λΌ!1. κ΅μœ‘κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λΆ€λŠ” κ΅κ³Όμ„œ μΆœνŒμ‚¬μ™€ μ§‘ν•„μžμ— λŒ€ν•œ λΆ€λ‹Ήν•œ 외압을 μ€‘λ‹¨ν•˜λΌ!

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

First Compensation Package from the ROK government over the Bereaved Families of Ulsan Bodo League Victims

The Bodo League, a.k.a., the National Guidance Alliance [ꡭ민보도연맹 in Korean], was a government subsidized organization to have those with the leftist leaning tendency registered and aim to convert them into the prevailing ideology of the time in the ROK. Later (shortly before the war and the beginning stage of the Korean War), those registered in the League were regarded as direct threats to the state, became subjects to a large number of massacres and summary executions. The South Korea's Central District Court ruled today, the government is responsible for the victims of Ulsan Bodo League Massacres, and thus providing compensation for their losses. Regardless of the scale of the compensation package, the ruling is significant since it is the first of the same kind.

법원 "μšΈμ‚°λ³΄λ„μ—°λ§Ή μœ μ‘±μ— 200μ–΅ 배상"보도연맹 사건 κ΄€λ ¨ κ΅­κ°€ 배상 첫 인정(μ„œμšΈ=μ—°ν•©λ‰΄μŠ€) 이세원 기자 = 보도연맹 사건 ν¬μƒμž μœ μ‘±μ—κ²Œ κ΅­κ°€κ°€ 200μ–΅ μ›λŒ€μ˜ λ°°μƒκΈˆμ„ μ§€κΈ‰ν•΄μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” λ²•μ›μ˜ 첫 판결이 λ‚΄λ €μ‘Œλ‹€. μ„œμšΈμ€‘μ•™μ§€λ²• λ―Όμ‚¬ν•©μ˜19λΆ€(μ§€μ˜μ²  λΆ€μž₯νŒμ‚¬)λŠ” 10일 μšΈμ‚° ꡭ민보도연맹 μ‚¬κ±΄μœΌλ‘œ μˆ¨μ§„ μž₯λͺ¨μ”¨μ˜ μ•„λ“€ λ“± 유쑱 508λͺ…이 κ΅­κ°€λ₯Ό μƒλŒ€λ‘œ μ œκΈ°ν•œ 손해배상 청ꡬ μ†Œμ†‘μ—μ„œ "κ΅­κ°€λŠ” μœ μ‘±μ—κ²Œ 합계 51μ–΅4천600μ—¬λ§Œ 원을 μ§€κΈ‰ν•˜λΌ"κ³  νŒκ²°ν–ˆλ‹€.
법원이 지급을 λͺ…ν•œ κΈˆμ•‘μ€ 1950년을 κΈ°μ€€μœΌλ‘œ ν•œ μ•‘μˆ˜μ΄κ³  μ„ κ³  λ‹ΉμΌκΉŒμ§€ λ§€λ…„ 5%의 μ§€μ—° 이자λ₯Ό μ§€κΈ‰ν•΄μ•Ό ν•˜λŠ” 점을 κ³ λ €ν•˜λ©΄ μ‹€μ œ 배상앑은 200μ–΅μ—¬ 원에 λ‹¬ν•œλ‹€. μ •λΆ€κ°€ μ’Œμ΅κ΄€λ ¨μžλ₯Ό μ „ν–₯μ‹œν‚€κ³  이듀을 ν†΅μ œν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•΄ 1949∼1950λ…„ μ‘°μ§ν•œ ꡭ민보도연맹은 λŒ€μ™Έμ μœΌλ‘œλŠ” μ „ν–₯자둜 κ΅¬μ„±λœ μ’Œμ΅μ „ν–₯자 λ‹¨μ²΄μž„μ„ ν‘œλ°©ν–ˆμ§€λ§Œ μ‹€μ œλ‘œλŠ” κ΄€λ³€λ‹¨μ²΄μ˜ 성격을 λ μ—ˆλ‹€. 6ㆍ25 μ „μŸμ΄ ν„°μ§€μž λ‹Ήμ‹œ μž₯μ„μœ€ 내무뢀 μΉ˜μ•ˆκ΅­μž₯은 μ „κ΅­μ˜ 보도연맹원 등을 μ¦‰μ‹œ κ΅¬μ†ν•˜λΌκ³  μ§€μ‹œν–ˆκ³  μšΈμ‚°κ²½μ°°μ„œμ™€ κ΅­κ΅° 정보ꡭ은 μšΈμ‚° 보도연맹원을 μ†Œμ§‘γ†κ΅¬κΈˆν–ˆλ‹€κ°€ 경남 μšΈμ‚°κ΅° λŒ€μš΄μ‚° κ³¨μ§œκΈ°μ™€ λ°˜μ • 고개 μΌλŒ€μ—μ„œ 집단 μ΄μ‚΄ν–ˆλ‹€. μœ μ‘±μ€ ν¬μƒμžμ˜ 사망 μ—¬λΆ€λ‚˜ 사λͺ… κ²½μœ„ 등에 λŒ€ν•΄ μ „ν˜€ μ•Œμ§€ λͺ»ν•˜λ‹€ 4ㆍ19 혁λͺ… 이후 유쑱회λ₯Ό κ²°μ„±ν•΄ 진상 규λͺ…κ³Ό μ±…μž„μž μ²˜λ²Œμ„ μš”κ΅¬ν–ˆκ³  이에 따라 ν¬μƒμž μœ κ³¨μ„ 발꡴, 합동 묘λ₯Ό μ„Έμ› μ§€λ§Œ 이후 5ㆍ16μΏ λ°νƒ€λ‘œ λ¬˜κ°€ 철거되고 진상 규λͺ…도 쀑단됐닀. 이후 진싀ㆍ화해λ₯Ό μœ„ν•œ κ³Όκ±°μ‚¬μ •λ¦¬μœ„μ›νšŒ(μ΄ν•˜ μœ„μ›νšŒ)λŠ” 2006λ…„ 10μ›” 이 사건에 λŒ€ν•œ 진상쑰사λ₯Ό κ°œμ‹œ, λ‹€μŒν•΄ 11μ›” 말께 μšΈμ‚°μ§€μ—­ ꡭ민보도연맹 사건과 κ΄€λ ¨λœ ν¬μƒμž λͺ…단 407λͺ…을 ν™•μ •ν–ˆλ‹€. 이에 μœ μ‘±μ€ ν¬μƒμžκ°€ ν—Œλ²•μ— 보μž₯된 μ‹ μ²΄μ˜ 자유, 생λͺ…κΆŒ, μ λ²•μ ˆμ°¨μ˜ 원칙, μž¬νŒμ„ 받을 ꢌ리 등을 μΉ¨ν•΄λ‹Ήν–ˆκ³  이 λ•Œλ¬Έμ— 유쑱이 μž…μ€ 정신적 ν”Όν•΄λ₯Ό λ°°μƒν•˜λΌκ³  μ†Œμ†‘μ„ λƒˆκ³  κ΅­κ°€λŠ” 손해배상 청ꡬꢌ이 μ†Œλ©Έλλ‹€κ³  μ£Όμž₯ν–ˆμœΌλ‚˜ 법원은 곡ꢌλ ₯ λ‚¨μš©μœΌλ‘œ μΈν•œ μ±…μž„μ„ μΈμ •ν–ˆλ‹€. μž¬νŒλΆ€λŠ” "1960년에 μœ ν•΄κ°€ λ°œκ΅΄λμ§€λ§Œ, 유쑱이 ν¬μƒμžμ˜ ꡬ체적인 μ‚¬λ§κ²½μœ„ 등에 λŒ€ν•΄μ„œλŠ” μ—¬μ „νžˆ μ•Œμ§€ λͺ»ν•˜λŠ” λ“± 진상이 규λͺ…λ˜μ§€ μ•Šμ•˜κ³  2007λ…„ μœ„μ›νšŒμ˜ ν¬μƒμž λͺ…단 λ°œν‘œλ‘œ λΉ„λ‘œμ†Œ 진싀을 μ•Œκ²Œ 됐닀"λ©° "손해배상 청ꡬꢌ이 μ‹œνš¨λ‘œ 인해 μ†Œλ©Έν–ˆλ‹€κ³  λ³Ό 수 μ—†λ‹€"κ³  νŒμ‹œν–ˆλ‹€. 또 "μœ μ‘±μ€ 보도연맹 사건 이후 ν¬μƒμžμ˜ 생사에 κ΄€ν•œ μ–΄λ–€ 톡지도 λ°›μ§€ λͺ»ν–ˆκ³  경찰이 μ§„μ‹€ 규λͺ… μš”κ΅¬μ— μ‘ν•˜μ§€ μ•ŠλŠ” λ“± μœ„μ›νšŒμ˜ λ°œν‘œ μ „κΉŒμ§€ κ΅­κ°€μ˜ μœ„λ²•μ— λŒ€ν•œ μ˜μ‹¬λ§ŒμœΌλ‘œ μ†Œμ†‘μ„ μ œκΈ°ν•˜κΈ°λŠ” μ–΄λ €μš΄ 사정이 μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€λŠ” 점도 μΈμ •λœλ‹€"κ³  λ§λΆ™μ˜€λ‹€. 이에 따라 법원은 ν¬μƒμžμ—κ²Œ 2천만 원, λ°°μš°μžμ—κ²Œ 1천만 원, λΆ€λͺ¨μ™€ μžλ…€μ—κ²Œ 200만 원, ν˜•μ œγ†μžλ§€μ—κ²ŒλŠ” 100만 원을 각각 μœ„μžλ£Œλ‘œ μ§€κΈ‰ν•˜λΌκ³  μ£Όλ¬Έν–ˆλ‹€. sewonlee@yna.co.kr

Friday, February 06, 2009

"일본이 'λ…λ„λŠ” 일본땅' νŒκ²°ν•΄λ„ λ”°λ₯Ό 건가?"

μ˜€λ§ˆμ΄λ‰΄μŠ€ 2009-02-05

μ§€λ‚œ 3일 뢀산고등법원 제5민사뢀(재판μž₯ 이승영 λΆ€μž₯νŒμ‚¬)λŠ” 일제 강점기 λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œμ€‘κ³΅μ—…μ— λŒλ €κ°€ 원폭 ν”Όν•΄λ₯Ό λ³Έ μ§•μš©ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œλ₯Ό μƒλŒ€λ‘œ ν•œκ΅­ 법원에 μ œμ†Œν•œ 손해배상 μ²­κ΅¬μ†Œμ†‘ ν•­μ†Œμ‹¬ μž¬νŒμ—μ„œ 'μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œ ν™•μ • 판결된 μ‚¬μ•ˆμ„ 받아듀이지 μ•Šμ„ κ·Όκ±°κ°€ μ—†λ‹€'λŠ” 이유둜 κΈ°κ°ν–ˆλ‹€.
이번 μž¬νŒμ€ 일제 'μ „λ²”'기업을 μƒλŒ€λ‘œ ν”Όν•΄κ΅­ ν•œκ΅­ 법원에 제기된 졜초의 재판으둜, ν–₯ν›„ λŒ€μΌ 과거사 μ†Œμ†‘μ˜ μ‹œκΈˆμ„μ΄ λœλ‹€λŠ” μ μ—μ„œ 재판 결과의 파μž₯은 적지 μ•Šμ„ κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ 보인닀.
이에 원고 μΈ‘ λ³€ν˜Έλ₯Ό 맑은 μ΅œλ΄‰νƒœ λ³€ν˜Έμ‚¬λ₯Ό λ§Œλ‚˜ 이 νŒκ²°μ— λ‹΄κΈ΄ μ˜λ―Έμ™€ 재판 결과에 λŒ€ν•œ 원고 μΈ‘ 견해λ₯Ό λ“€μ–΄λ³΄μ•˜λ‹€.

▲ μ΅œλ΄‰νƒœ λ³€ν˜Έμ‚¬κ°€ λΆ€μ‚° 고법 판결 직후 κ°€μ§„ κΈ°μžνšŒκ²¬μ—μ„œ μ·¨μž¬μ§„λ“€μ—κ²Œ λ―Όμ‚¬μ†Œμ†‘λ²• 쑰문을 μ§šμ–΄κ°€λ©° 판결 결과에 λŒ€ν•΄ κ°•λ ₯ν•˜κ²Œ 이의λ₯Ό μ œκΈ°ν•˜κ³  μžˆλ‹€.
- 싀망이 큰 것 κ°™λ‹€. μš°μ„  이번 μž¬νŒμ— λŒ€ν•΄ μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ μƒκ°ν•˜λ‚˜?
"이번 μž¬νŒμ€ 일제 피해에 λŒ€ν•΄ 피해ꡭ인 μš°λ¦¬λ‚˜λΌ 법원에 졜초둜 제기된 μž¬νŒμ΄μ—ˆκ³ , ν”Όν•΄κ΅­κ°€μ—μ„œ λ‚˜μ˜¨ 졜초의 고법 νŒκ²°μ΄λ‹€. 일본, λ―Έκ΅­, μ€‘κ΅­μ—μ„œλ„ 재판이 λ²Œμ–΄μ§€κ³  μžˆμ§€λ§Œ ν”Όν•΄κ΅­μ˜ 고법 νŒκ²°λ‘œλŠ” 졜초둜 λ‚˜μ˜¨ 역사적 νŒκ²°μ΄λ‹€. 그런데 λ„μ €νžˆ ν”Όν•΄κ΅­μ—μ„œλŠ” λ‚˜μ˜¬ 수 μ—†λŠ” κ²°κ³Όκ°€ λ‚˜μ˜€κ³  λ§μ•˜λ‹€. μ„€λ§ˆ μ „λ²”κ΅­ 일본의 νŒλ‹¨μ„ 받아듀일 κ²ƒμ΄λΌκ³ λŠ” κΏˆμ—λ„ 생각 λͺ»ν–ˆλ‹€. μ°Έ λ‹Ήν˜ΉμŠ€λŸ½λ‹€."
- μž¬νŒλΆ€μ˜ λ…Όλ¦¬λŠ” μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œ λ‚˜μ˜¨ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œ κ΄€λ ¨ ν™•μ • 판결 κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό 우리 λ²•μ›μ—μ„œλ„ λ°›μ•„λ“€μ—¬μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” 것, 또 ν•˜λ‚˜λŠ” μ‹œνš¨λ¬Έμ œλ₯Ό μ–ΈκΈ‰ν•œ 것 같은데?
"κ·Έλ ‡μ§€ μ•Šμ•„λ„ 그게 말이 λ˜μ§€ μ•ŠλŠ”λ‹€κ³  수차 μ€€λΉ„μ„œλ©΄μ„ 톡해 μ£Όμž₯ν•΄ μ™”λ‹€. μž¬νŒλΆ€λ‘œμ„œ 일본 μ‚¬λ²•λΆ€μ˜ 결정에 μΌμ’…μ˜ λ™λ£Œμ˜μ‹μ΄ μžˆμ„ μˆ˜λŠ” μžˆκ² μ§€λ§Œ, 일본 판결이 κ·Έλ™μ•ˆ 일제 ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ˜ ꢌ리λ₯Ό 봉쇄해 온 것인데, 그것을 λ°›μ•„λ“€μ΄κ² λ‹€λŠ” μ μ—μ„œ 이번 νŒκ²°μ€ κ°€μž₯ 반 ν—Œλ²•μ  판결이라 ν•  수 μžˆλ‹€."
"2μ›” 3일, 사법 μΉ˜μš•μ΄μž λŒ€μΌ κ΅΄μš•μ˜ λ‚ λ‘œ 기둝될 것"
- 무슨 말인가. μ’€ 더 μ„€λͺ…ν•΄ 달라.
"우리 λ―Όμ‚¬μ†Œμ†‘λ²• 제217μ‘° 3ν˜Έμ—λŠ” 제3ꡭ의 νŒκ²°μ΄λΌλ„ 할지라도 '그것이 λŒ€ν•œλ―Όκ΅­μ˜ μ„ λŸ‰ν•œ ν’μ†μ΄λ‚˜ 그밖에 μ‚¬νšŒμ§ˆμ„œμ— μ–΄κΈ‹λ‚˜μ§€ μ•Šμ„ λ•Œμ—λ§Œ' 효λ ₯이 μΈμ •λ˜λŠ” κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ ν•˜κ³  μžˆλ‹€.
예둜 μ§€κΈˆκΉŒμ§€ μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œ 이뀄진 νŒκ²°μ€ ν•œμΌλ³‘ν•©μ„ λ‹Ήμ—°ν•œ κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ μ—¬κΈ°κ³  일제 κ°•μ œλ™μ› μ—­μ‹œ 법에 μ˜ν•΄ ν•©λ²•μ μœΌλ‘œ μ§‘ν–‰λœ κ²ƒμ΄λΌλŠ” 것을 μ „μ œλ‘œ κΉ”κ³  μžˆλ‹€. 그런데 이것을 우리 사법뢀가 λ°›μ•„μ€˜μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” 것이 μ•„λ‹ˆκ³  무엇이냐?
이번 고법 μž¬νŒλΆ€μ˜ λ…Όλ¦¬λŒ€λ‘œλΌκ³  ν•˜λ©΄ μš°λ¦¬λŠ” 아직도 λͺ¨λ‘ 일본 κ΅­λ―Όμ΄λ‚˜ λ§ˆμ°¬κ°€μ§€λ‹€. μ™œλƒν•˜λ©΄, μΌμ œμ‹œλŒ€μ—” λͺ¨λ‘ 아버지, 할아버지가 μ°½μ”¨κ°œλͺ… ν•˜κ³  일본ꡭ민으둜 돼 μžˆμ—ˆλŠ”λ°, 그러면 μ–Έμ œ μš°λ¦¬κ°€ 일본 ꡭ적법에 따라 ν•©λ²•μ μœΌλ‘œ μΌλ³Έκ΅­μ μ—μ„œ νƒˆν‡΄ν•˜λŠ” 절차λ₯Ό 거친 적 μžˆμ—ˆλŠ”κ°€? ν•œλ§ˆλ””λ‘œ 이번 고법 νŒκ²°μ€ 우리 ꡭ민이 λ‹€ 일본 μ‚¬λžŒμ΄λΌλŠ” λ…Όλ¦¬λ‚˜ λ§ˆμ°¬κ°€μ§€λ‹€.
3·1μš΄λ™μœΌλ‘œ μ„±λ¦½ν•œ μž„μ‹œμ •λΆ€μ˜ 법톡을 κ³„μŠΉν•œ λŒ€ν•œλ―Όκ΅­μ΄, ν•œμΌλ³‘ν•©μ„ 합법적이라고 보아 우리 μž„μ‹œ μ •λΆ€λ₯Ό 'λ°˜κ΅­κ°€λ‹¨μ²΄'둜 λ³΄λŠ” 일본 νŒκ²°μ„ κ·ΈλŒ€λ‘œ λ”°λ₯΄λŠ” 것은 λ„ˆλ¬΄λ‚˜ μΉ˜μš•μ μ΄κ³  κ΅΄μš•μ μ΄λ‹€. λ‚˜μ€‘μ— 역사가가 기둝할 λ•Œ 2μ›” 3일 νŒκ²°μ€ κ³Όκ±° μΈν˜λ‹Ή 사건보닀도 λ”ν•œ 사법 μΉ˜μš•μ΄μž, λŒ€μΌ κ΅΄μš•μ˜ λ‚ λ‘œ 기둝될 κ²ƒμž„μ΄ λΆ„λͺ…ν•˜λ‹€."
"일본 독도 판결 λ‚˜λ©΄ ν•œκ΅­μ—μ„œλ„ λ°›μ•„λ“€μ—¬μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” 것인가?”
- 원고듀 ν‘œμ •μ„ λ³΄λ‹ˆ μ—­μ‹œ 좩격이 큰 것 κ°™λ‹€. μ „ν˜€ μ˜ˆμƒμΉ˜ λͺ»ν•œ 결과인가?
"κ·Έλ ‡λ‹€. 이 νŒκ²°μ€ μ‰½κ²Œ λ§ν•˜λ©΄ μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œ 독도가 일본의 땅이라고 ν™•μ •νŒκ²°μ΄ λ‚¬μœΌλ©΄ κ·ΈλŒ€λ‘œ ν•œκ΅­μ—μ„œλ„ 받아듀여도 λ¬Έμ œκ°€ μ—†λ‹€λŠ” κ²ƒμ΄λ‚˜ λ§ˆμ°¬κ°€μ§€λ‹€. 이게 말이 λ˜λŠλƒ?
톡상적인 κ±°λž˜κ΄€κ³„μ˜ 판결이라면 ν•œ·μΌκ°„μ˜ νŒκ²°μ„ μ„œλ‘œ μŠΉμΈν•˜λŠ” 것은 λ¬Έλͺ…κ΅­κ°„ μžˆμ„ 수 μžˆλŠ” μΌμ΄μ§€λ§Œ, 일본의 μ „μŸ μ±…μž„μ„ λ¬»λŠ” νŒκ²°μ„ κ·Έ λ³Έμ§ˆλ„ κ³ λ €ν•˜μ§€ μ•Šκ³  ν”Όν•΄κ΅­ ν•œκ΅­μ˜ 법원이 κ°€ν•΄κ΅­μ˜ νŒκ²°μ„ 받아듀인닀고 ν•˜λŠ” 것은 νƒ€λ‹Ήν•˜μ§€ μ•Šμ„ 뿐만 μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ 우리 ν—Œλ²•μ—λ„ λ°˜ν•˜λŠ” 것이닀.
우리 ν—Œλ²• μ „λ¬Έμ—λŠ” 3·1μš΄λ™μœΌλ‘œ μ„±λ¦½ν•œ μž„μ‹œμ •λΆ€ 법톡을 κ³„μŠΉν•œλ‹€κ³  λͺ…μ‹œλ˜μ–΄ μžˆλ‹€. μ•„μšΈλŸ¬ 우리 ν—Œλ²•μ€ μΉ¨λž΅μ „μŸμ„ λΆ€μΈν•˜κ³  μžˆλŠ”λ°, μ΄λŠ” μΉ¨λž΅μ „μŸμœΌλ‘œ λ°œμƒν•œ 법읡 μΉ¨ν•΄λ₯Ό λ°©μΉ˜ν•΄μ„œλŠ” μ•ˆ 되며, κ·Έ 손해λ₯Ό μ •λ‹Ήν•˜κ²Œ νšŒλ³΅ν•΄μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” λœ»μ΄λ‹€. 이번 νŒκ²°μ€ μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ ν—Œλ²•μ  의미λ₯Ό λ¬΄μ‹œν•˜λŠ” λ°˜ν—Œλ²•μ μΈ κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ λ³Ό μˆ˜λ°–μ— μ—†λ‹€. 일본법과 ν•œκ΅­λ²•μ˜ κ°€μž₯ 큰 차이점은 λ°”λ‘œ ν—Œλ²• 정신에 μžˆλ‹€. λŒ€ν‘œμ μœΌλ‘œ 'μ²œν™©(일왕)'을 μΈμ •ν•˜μ§€ μ•ŠλŠ” 민주곡화ꡭ이 우리 ν—Œλ²• 제1μ‘° 1항이닀."
- 판결이 μ΄λ ‡κ²ŒκΉŒμ§€ λ‚˜μ˜¬ μˆ˜λ°–μ— μ—†μ—ˆλ˜ μ΄μœ μ— λŒ€ν•΄μ„œλŠ” μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ μƒκ°ν•˜λ‚˜?
"μ•žμ„œ μ—¬μš΄νƒμ”¨ λ“± 일제 ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ μ‹ μΌλ³Έμ œμ² μ„ μƒλŒ€λ‘œ μ œκΈ°ν•œ 손해배상 μ†Œμ†‘μ—μ„œ 2008λ…„ 4μ›” 3일 μ„œμšΈμ€‘μ•™μ§€λ²•μ€ 일본 λ²•μ›μ˜ ν™•μ • νŒκ²°μ„ μŠΉμΈν•  수 μžˆλ‹€κ³  ν•΄ κΈ°κ°ν•œ λ°” μžˆλŠ”λ°, 이번 재판 μ—­μ‹œ κ·Έλ•Œ νŒκ²°μ„ 따라간 것이닀.
λ‹Ήμ‹œ μ„œμšΈμ€‘μ•™μ§€λ²•μ˜ νŒκ²°μ— λŒ€ν•΄ ν—Œλ²•μ  κ²€ν† κ°€ μ œλŒ€λ‘œ μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€λ©΄ 이번 νŒκ²°μ€ κ²°μ½” λ‚˜μ˜€μ§€ μ•Šμ•˜μ„ 것이닀. 이 μ μ—μ„œ μ‹ μΌλ³Έμ œμ² μ˜ λ‹΄λ‹Ήλ³€ν˜ΈμΈλ‹¨κ³Ό 곡쑰λ₯Ό μΆ©λΆ„νžˆ ν•˜μ§€ λͺ»ν•œ 잘λͺ»μ€ 우리 λ³€ν˜ΈμΈλ‹¨μ—λ„ μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€κ³  μƒκ°ν•œλ‹€. 이 점은 λ°˜μ„±ν•œλ‹€."
λ¬Έμ„œ μˆ˜λ Ήλ„ κ±°λΆ€ν•˜λ©° μ‹œκ°„ 끌던 λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œ, 'μ•„λ¦¬λž‘ 3호' 수주
- 이번 νŒκ²°μ€ 였히렀 1심 νŒκ²°λ³΄λ‹€ ν›„ν‡΄ν•œ 결과둜 λ³΄μ΄λŠ”λ°.
"κ·Έλ ‡λ‹€. 그쀑 ν•˜λ‚˜λ₯Ό μ§€μ ν•˜μžλ©΄ 1μ‹¬μ—μ„œλŠ” νƒœν‰μ–‘μ „μŸ μ „μ˜ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œμ™€ μ „ν›„ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œμ— λŒ€ν•΄ 사싀상 같은 νšŒμ‚¬λ‘œ 봐야 ν•œλ‹€κ³  νŒλ‹¨ν–ˆλŠ”λ°, 이번 νŒκ²°μ—μ„œλŠ” μ΄κ²ƒλ§ˆμ €λ„ 번볡이 된 κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ 보인닀.
그런데 이것이 μ›ƒκΈ°λŠ” 게, κ·Έλ™μ•ˆ ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œ ν•œκ΅­λ²•μΈμ„ μ°Ύμ•„κ°€ ν•œλ²ˆ λ§Œλ‚˜λ €κ³  해도 μ „μŸ μ „ νšŒμ‚¬μ™€ λ‹€λ₯΄λ‹€λ©° λ§Œλ‚˜μ£Όμ§€λ„ μ•Šλ˜ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œκ°€, μ•„λ¦¬λž‘ 3호 μœ„μ„±κ³Ό κ΄€λ ¨ν•΄μ„œλŠ” ν•œκ΅­ν•­κ³΅μš°μ£Όμ—°κ΅¬μ›κ³Ό λͺ¨λ“  κ΄€λ ¨λ¬Έμ„œ μˆ˜λ Ήμ„ λ‹€ ν•΄μ™”λ˜ 사싀이닀. λ¬Έμ„œλ₯Ό 톡해 ν™•μΈλœ λ‚΄μš©μ΄λ‹€.
이번 ν•­μ†Œμ‹¬μ˜ ν•­μ†Œμž₯ μ—­μ‹œ νšŒμ‚¬κ°€ λ‹€λ₯΄λ‹€κ³  μˆ˜λ Ήμ„ κ±°λΆ€ν•΄ μ§€κΈˆκΉŒμ§€ κ΅­μ œμ†‘λ‹¬κΉŒμ§€ ν–ˆμ—ˆλŠ”λ°, 이런 μž”κΎ€λ₯Ό ν•œκ΅­ 법원이 λ°›μ•„λ“€μ—¬μ•Ό ν•œλ‹€λŠ” 것인가? 특히 μž¬νŒμ„ 9λ…„μ§Έ λŒμ–΄ 온 κ°€μž₯ 큰 μ΄μœ λŠ” κ°œμΈμ²­κ΅¬κΆŒμ— κ΄€ν•œ μ†Œλ©Έμ—¬λΆ€λ₯Ό ν™•μΈν•˜λŠ” κ²ƒμ΄μ—ˆλ‹€. κ·Έλ™μ•ˆ 일본 νŒκ²°μ€ ν•œμΌν˜‘μ • 및 일본의 ꡭ내법에 μ˜ν•΄ 개인 청ꡬꢌ이 μ†Œλ©Έλλ‹€κ³  μ£Όμž₯ν•΄μ™”λ‹€.
그에 λ°˜ν•΄ 우리 μ •λΆ€λŠ” 2005년에 40μ—¬ λ…„ λ§Œμ— ν•œμΌν˜‘μ • λ¬Έμ„œλ₯Ό κ³΅κ°œν•  λ‹Ήμ‹œ, λ°˜μΈλ„μ  범죄와 κ΄€λ ¨ν•΄μ„œλŠ” ν•œμΌν˜‘μ •κ³Ό λ¬΄κ΄€ν•˜λ‹€λ©° 일본에 법적 μ±…μž„μ΄ μžˆλ‹€λŠ” 법적 견해λ₯Ό λͺ…λ°±νžˆ 밝힌 λ°” μžˆλ‹€.
λ‹Ήμ‹œ λ―Όκ΄€κ³΅λ™μœ„μ›νšŒμ˜ 민간인 μœ„μ›μž₯이 ν˜„μž¬ μ΄μš©ν›ˆ λŒ€λ²•μ›μž₯인데, 이번 νŒκ²°μ€ 이런 λ―Όκ΄€κ³΅λ™μœ„μ›νšŒμ˜ κΆŒμœ„ μžˆλŠ” 곡식적인 법적 견해쑰차 λ¬΄μ‹œν•˜κ³  일본 νŒκ²°μ„ λ”°λΌκ°€κ² λ‹€λŠ” κ²ƒμ΄λ‚˜ λ§ˆμ°¬κ°€μ§€λ‹€."
10λ…„ 'μ‹œνš¨' μ μš©ν•˜λ©΄ 64λ…„ μ§€λ‚œ 일제 κ³Όκ±° 청산은 λΆˆκ°€λŠ₯
- 10λ…„μ΄λΌλŠ” μ‹œνš¨λ„ μ–ΈκΈ‰ν–ˆλŠ”λ°?
"μ–Όλ§ˆ μ „ '독도가 일본 땅이 μ•„λ‹ˆλ‹€'λΌλŠ” 일본법령을 졜초둜 λ°œκ²¬ν•œ μž¬μΌλ™ν¬ 3μ„Έ μ΄μ–‘μˆ˜μ”¨μ™€ ν•¨κ»˜ 'μΌν•œνšŒλ‹΄ μ „λ©΄κ³΅κ°œλ₯Ό μš”κ΅¬ν•˜λŠ” 회' κ³ λ‹€μΌ€ νžˆλ‘œμ½” 사무ꡭμž₯이 ν•œκ΅­μ„ λ°©λ¬Έν•œ λ°” μžˆλŠ”λ°, μ‹œνš¨λ¬Έμ œλ‘œ 1μ‹¬μ—μ„œ 기각된 사싀을 μ•Œκ³ λŠ” 깜짝 놀라더라.
μ•„λ‹ˆ 심지어 μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œμ‘°μ°¨ νŒλ‘€κ°€ 계속 λ°œμ „ν•΄ 와 본건과 같은 전후보상 μž¬νŒμ—μ„œλŠ” μ΅œμ†Œν•œ μ‹œνš¨λ¬Έμ œλ‘œλŠ” κΈ°κ°ν•˜λŠ” 판결이 μ–΄λ €μ›Œμ Έ ν•œμΌμ²­κ΅¬κΆŒ ν˜‘μ •μ„ ν•‘κ³„λ‘œ μ •μΉ˜μ  νŒλ‹¨μ„ ν•˜κ³  μžˆλŠ” λ§ˆλ‹Ήμ—, 가해ꡭ도 μ•„λ‹Œ ν”Όν•΄κ΅­κ°€μ˜ λ²•μ›μ—μ„œ μ‹œνš¨λ¬Έμ œλ₯Ό λ”°μ§„λ‹€λŠ” 게 말이 λ˜λŠλƒλŠ” 것이닀.
κ·Έ 말을 λ“£κ³  κ³ λ‹€μΌ€ νžˆλ‘œμ½” 사무ꡭμž₯이 μ¦‰μ‹œ 이번 λ‹΄λ‹Ή νŒμ‚¬ν•œν…Œ 직접 νŽΈμ§€κΉŒμ§€ μ¨μ„œ 보낸 일이 μžˆλŠ”λ° λ‹΄λ‹Ή νŒμ‚¬κ°€ κ·Έ νŽΈμ§€λ‚˜ μ œλŒ€λ‘œ 읽어 λ΄€λŠ”μ§€ λͺ¨λ₯΄κ² λ‹€.
μž¬νŒλΆ€μ˜ λ…Όλ¦¬λŒ€λ‘œ ν•˜μžλ©΄ 원고듀이 ν”Όν•΄λ₯Ό λ³Έ μ‹œκΈ°μΈ 1944λ…„~1945λ…„μœΌλ‘œλΆ€ν„° 10년이 μ§€λ‚¬λ‹€λŠ” μ£Όμž₯μ΄μ–΄μ„œ μ†Œλ₯Ό μ œκΈ°ν•  수 μ—†λ‹€λŠ” μž…μž₯인데, κ³Όμ—° 일제 ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ κ·Έλ™μ•ˆ 'ꢌ리 μœ„μ— μž μž” μžλ“€μΈκ°€' ν•˜λŠ” 것이닀. ν•΄λ°©κ³Ό ν•œκ΅­μ „μŸμ˜ ν˜Όλž€κΈ°, ν•œμΌμ²­κ΅¬κΆŒν˜‘μ •μ— μ˜ν•΄ ꢌ리회볡의 κΈ°νšŒλ§ˆμ € μ² μ €νžˆ 차단당해 온 μƒνƒœ, 우리 μž„μ‹œμ •λΆ€μ˜ 법톡을 κ³„μŠΉν•˜λŠ” 우리 ν—Œλ²•μ •μ‹ μ„ μƒκ°ν•˜λ©΄ λ„μ €νžˆ 이해할 수 μ—†λŠ” νŒκ²°μ΄λ‹€.
가해ꡭ도 μ•„λ‹Œ 우리 사법뢀가 '10λ…„'μ΄λΌλŠ” μ‹œνš¨κ°€ 지났기 λ•Œλ¬Έμ— μ•ˆ λœλ‹€κ³  ν•œλ‹€λ‹ˆ, μ°Έ 어이가 μ—†λ‹€. μ΄λ ‡κ²Œ 되면 이미 10년이 μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ ν•΄λ°© 64년이 더 μ§€λ‚¬λŠ”λ° 더 이상 λŒ€ν•œλ―Όκ΅­ λ•…μ—μ„œλŠ” 일제 과거청산은 λΆˆκ°€λŠ₯ν•˜λ‹€λŠ” 것 μ•„λ‹Œκ°€?
μΈν˜λ‹Ή μ‚¬κ±΄μ΄λ‚˜ κ΄‘μ£Ό 5.18ν•­μŸ, μ΅œμ’…κΈΈ μ„œμšΈλŒ€ ꡐ수 사건 λ“± κ³Όκ±° μ •κΆŒν•˜μ—μ„œ 이뀄진 μˆ˜λ§Žμ€ 사건듀도 κ³Όκ±°μ²­μ‚° μ°¨μ›μ—μ„œ μƒˆλ‘œ νŒκ²°ν•˜κ³  μžˆλŠ”λ°, λŒ€μΌ κ³Όκ±° 청산에 10λ…„μ΄λΌλŠ” μ‹œνš¨λ₯Ό μž£λŒ€λ₯Ό λ“€μ΄λ°€μ§€λŠ” 정말 λͺ°λžλ‹€."
- μž μ‹œ λ‹€λ₯Έ 질문인데, μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ λΆ€μ‚°μ—μ„œ μž¬νŒμ„ μ‹œμž‘ν•˜κ²Œ λλ‚˜?
"2000λ…„ λ‹Ήμ‹œ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œ μ—°λ½μ‚¬λ¬΄μ†Œκ°€ 뢀산에 μžˆμ–΄ 뢀산지방법원에 μ œκΈ°ν•˜κ²Œ 됐닀. 그런데 κ·Έ λ’€λ‘œ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œκ°€ μ—°λ½μ‚¬λ¬΄μ†Œλ₯Ό νμ‡„ν•˜κ³  ν•œκ΅­ λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œλΌκ³  ν•˜λŠ” νšŒμ‚¬λ₯Ό 섀립해 λ¬Έμ„œμˆ˜λ Ήλ§ˆμ € κ±°λΆ€ν•˜κ³  λ§μ•˜λ‹€. κ·ΈλŸ¬λŠ” 톡에 일일이 λ²ˆμ—­ν•΄ 본사에 κ΅­μ œμ†‘λ‹¬μ„ ν•˜λŠλΌ 6κ°œμ›” λ™μ•ˆ ν—ˆμ†‘μ„Έμ›”ν•΄μ•Ό ν–ˆλ‹€. λ―Έμ“°λΉ„μ‹œμ˜ ν–‰νƒœλ₯Ό 보면 μž¬νŒμ„ μ§€μ—°μ‹œμΌœ ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ ν•œ 뢄이라도 λŒμ•„κ°€μ‹œλ„λ‘ λ§Œλ“€κ² λ‹€λŠ” μ‹¬λ³΄μ²˜λŸΌ λŠκ»΄μ§„λ‹€."
"마치 ν•œκ΅­λ²•μ› μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ 일본법원 κ°™λ‹€"
- 상고 μ—¬λΆ€λŠ” μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ λ˜λ‚˜?
"ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ΄ λŒ€ν•œλ―Όκ΅­ 사법뢀λ₯Ό λ―Ώμ§€ λͺ»ν•˜κ² λ‹€κ³  ν•˜λ©΄μ„œλ„ 이번 νŒκ²°λ§ŒνΌμ€ λ„μ €νžˆ 받아듀이지 λͺ»ν•˜κ² λ‹€λŠ” νƒœλ„μΈ 만큼 ν”Όν•΄μžλ“€μ˜ μ˜μ‚¬μ— λ”°λ₯Ό 생각이닀. μ†”μ§νžˆ 였늘 판결만 보면 마치 ν•œκ΅­λ²•μ›μ΄ μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ 일본법원 κ°™λ‹€."
- 9년을 λŒμ–΄μ˜¨ 사건인데 κ²°κ΅­ νŒ¨μ†Œν•˜κ³  λ§μ•˜λ‹€. 이번 μž¬νŒμ— λŒ€ν•΄ μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œλ„ κ΄€μ‹¬μžˆκ²Œ μ§€μΌœλ³΄κ³  μžˆμ—ˆμ„ν…λ°, μ–΄λ–€ 심정인가?
"어젯밀에 ν•˜λ„ μ–΅μšΈν•΄ 잠이 잘 μ˜€μ§€ μ•Šμ•˜λ‹€. 이 사건을 맑을 λ•Œ 일본 λ³€ν˜Έμ‚¬λ“€μ΄ λ„μ €νžˆ μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œλŠ” 양심적인 판결이 λ‚˜μ˜€μ§€ μ•Šμ•„ ν•œκ΅­μ˜ 사법뢀λ₯Ό λ―Ώκ³  μž¬νŒμ„ ν•΄ 보자고 ν•΄μ„œ μ œνŒμ„ μ‹œμž‘ν–ˆλŠ”λ° 이 재판 κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ 전달할지 걱정이닀. μΌλ³Έμ—μ„œλŠ” 번번이 νŒ¨μ†Œν•΄ 피해ꡭ인 ν•œκ΅­μ—μ„œ μ—΄λ¦¬λŠ” μž¬νŒμ€ λ‹€λ₯Ό 것이라고 μƒκ°ν–ˆμ„ 텐데, μ†”μ§νžˆ 일본 λ³€ν˜Έμ‚¬ 보기가 λΆ€λ„λŸ½λ‹€."
이ꡭ언 기자