한미 FTA 추진근거에 대한 정치경제 이론적 검토

이근 서울대학교 국제학연구소 2008 국제지역연구 Vol.17 No.4

The purpose of this paper is to assess the logic behind Korea's pursuit of the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement from the perspective of political economic theories and discourses. In particular, this paper tries to evaluate the appropriateness of the theoretical and logical connection between the announced goals of the Korea-US FTA and the means to achieve such goals. According to former President Roh Moo-hyun's statements, Korea's goals of Korea-US FTA were promotion of Korea's competitiveness in service industry and resolving the problem of economic and social polarization in Korea. The theoretical justification for the promotion of service industry competitiveness was a simple logic of “more competition for more competitiveness.” The theoretical logic for the FTA being helpful in resolving the problem of polarization has never been clearly suggested. Furthermore, the two major goals of the Korea-US FTA have gradually disappeared as the negotiations proceeded. The second section of the paper introduces new growth theory, economic geography, and strategic trade policy theory to theoretically assess the relationship between the announced goals of the Korea-US FTA and the means to achieve the goals. The theories reveal the possibilities that the Korea-US FTA may in fact prevent the development of new growth engines in Korea including service, communication, and knowledge industries, and does not help resolving the polarization problem. Therefore, the alternative FTA or trade strategy of Korea should take the issue of sequencing more seriously. 본 논문의 목적은 노무현 정부와 이명박 정부에 걸쳐서 추진하는 한미 FTA의 추진근거를 정치경제학적 이론과 논의를 통하여 검증하는데 있다. 특히 한미 FTA를 통하여 추구하고자 하는 목표와 수단 간의 연결이 이론적으로 적절한 것인지를 평가하고자 하였다. 노무현 대통령의 언급을 중심으로 보면 한미 FTA의 목표는 서비스 산업 경쟁력 제고와 양극화 문제 해소에 있었다. 그리고 그 이론적 근거는 단순히 개방을 하면 경쟁을 통하여 서비스 산업 경쟁력이 제고된다는 논리였으며, 반면 양극화 해소에 관한 이론적 근거는 제시되지 않았다. 한편 초기 노무현 대통령이 제시한 서비스 산업 경쟁력과 양극화 해소라는 목표는 시간이 지나면서 매우 모호하게 포장되었고 점차 중심 목표에서 사라지는 경향을 보였다. 한편 정부는 한미 FTA에 대한 비판을 모두 종속이론으로 분류하여 잘못된 비판이라는 대응을 하고 있으나, 종속이론이 아닌 경제학계에서 논의되는 신성장 이론, 경제지리학, 전략무역정책 이론을 통하여 한미 FTA의 추진목표와 수단 간의 연결을 평가해 보더라도 그 연결 관계가 적절히 이루어지지 않았다는 이론적 검토가 가능하다. 특히 이들 이론들은 성급한 대폭적인 개방이 서비스 산업을 포함한 한국의 미래 성장 동력 육성을 오히려 저해할 수 있다는 가능성을 제기하였고, 양극화의 해소라는 목표도 이론적으로 설득력이 없다는 결론을 도출할 수 있었다. 대안으로서 미국이 한국에서 과점적 지배를 할 수 있는 통신, 서비스, 지식 산업 등의 분야는 성급한 시장개방을 지양하고 한국이 어느 정도 경쟁력을 확보한 분야는 시장을 개방하는 전략이 필요하다.

Korea-Japan Relations during the Second Republic of Korea: A Counterfactual Analysis of the Aborted Korea-Japan Normalization

윤태룡 사단법인 한국평화연구학회 2009 평화학연구 Vol.10 No.2

This paper purports to provide a counterfactual analysis of a non-event during the Second Republic of Korea, that is, the aborted Korea-Japan Normalization. The author argues that without General Park Chung Hee’s military coup on May 16, 1961, the rapprochement between the two former enemies would have been possible during the Second Republic of Korea. The ongoing process of negotiations for diplomatic normalization between South Korea and Japan would have been accelerated and have reached the ultimate goal but for the military’s unconstitutional toppling down of the first democratic regime in South Korea. Many experts argue that President Park’s strong leadership or the U.S. pressure is the main reason for the achievement of Korea-Japan Normalization. However, based on counterfactual analysis, this paper concludes that Korea-Japan Normalization would have been achieved much earlier than the year of 1965 when the two states actually reached an agreement only after spending four years of tough bargaining after the coup in South Korea. This paper purports to provide a counterfactual analysis of a non-event during the Second Republic of Korea, that is, the aborted Korea-Japan Normalization. The author argues that without General Park Chung Hee’s military coup on May 16, 1961, the rapprochement between the two former enemies would have been possible during the Second Republic of Korea. The ongoing process of negotiations for diplomatic normalization between South Korea and Japan would have been accelerated and have reached the ultimate goal but for the military’s unconstitutional toppling down of the first democratic regime in South Korea. Many experts argue that President Park’s strong leadership or the U.S. pressure is the main reason for the achievement of Korea-Japan Normalization. However, based on counterfactual analysis, this paper concludes that Korea-Japan Normalization would have been achieved much earlier than the year of 1965 when the two states actually reached an agreement only after spending four years of tough bargaining after the coup in South Korea.

Dynamics in Northeast Asian Regional Order: Explaining Korea-Japan-U.S. Relations Right After Nixon Doctrine, 1969-1971

윤태룡 한국동북아학회 2013 한국동북아논총 Vol.18 No.2

This study purports to analyze the dynamics of Korea-Japan-U.S. relations right after the Nixon Doctrine (1969-1971) and to define the nature of the Korea-Japan relations in the context of the macro-trends of continuously enlarged cooperation after 1965 Korea-Japan diplomatic Normalization. The reason for my efforts to redefine the nature of Korea-Japan relations especially during this period of 1969-1971 is that, in my view, Victor Cha's study overemphasizes the role of U.S. influence on Korea-Japan relations by solely focusing on the causal links between the U.S. disengagement policy and the so-called exceptionally cooperative Korea-Japan relations. According to the logic of Cha's 'quasi-alliance model,' the high level of cooperation in Korea-Japan relations is mainly caused by these two states' abandonment fears regarding the United States, which are traced to the indirect or unintended consequences of the U.S. disengagement policy. However, though we witness the increased cooperation in Korea-Japan relations in this period of 1969-1971, this does not constitute a particularly peculiar and new trend, but a part of consistently macro-trend of expanding cooperation in the whole period of 1965-1971 of Korea-Japan relations including this period of 1969-1971 which is overused by those who emphasize the importance of indirect effect of the U.S. disengagement. Of course, this study does not deny the fact that there is an advancement in Korea-Japan relations in this period of 1969-1971. However, there has been not only a continuation of expanding trade and political relations, but also a conflictive aspect, evidencing the mixture of cooperation/frictions at the same time in the history of the bilateral relations. This means that though we cannot ignore the U.S. factor in grasping the dynamics in Korea-Japan relations, we should also take into account not only the common interest (such as, economic cooperation), but also the fundamental conflict of interests traced back to historical animosity between the two states.

China-Korea Trade and Investment Development and Free Trade Area(FTA) Prospects

Kang Xie 한국무역학회 2003 國際學術大會 論文集 Vol.2003 No.10

Since Aug.24, 1992 when the diplomatic relations between China and Korea was established, China and Korea trade and investment has been developed rapidly. Complementarity, co-existence and competitiveness all exist, however, Complementarity is more important than competitiveness. So if China and Korea co-operated well, two countries would have good future. China and Korea trade and investment is closely connected with the regional integration. Recently, the whole world has entered the new stage (new generation) of bilateral and multilateral FTA. In Asia, ASEAN and the North Asia area have been the two important economic regions. China-Japan-Korea FTA has its inevitable trend. However, it takes much time. In the realistic world it is necessary to lay stress on China-Korea FTA, China-Japan FTA and Korea-Japan FTA. Among them we should discuss the China-Korea FTA first. The establishment of the China-Korea FTA has its advantages and disadvantages, however the advantages will exceed the disadvantages. The deepening development of the China-Korea FTA depends on the development of the Northeast China Area, practice experiences of 10 + 1 and CEPA, and supports of the governments. The China-Korea FTA starts from industrial co-operations, enlarging new investment areas, developing the Northeast China Area and the political role of governments. The China-Korea FTA can be predicable and will establish the firm foundation for China-Japan-Korea FTA.

박정희 정권의 한일어업회담

김민석 한국근현대사학회 2010 한국 근현대사 연구 Vol.53 No.-

Park, Chung-hee administration pushed Korea-Japan Conference Agreement ergatively supported by both the political policy of the United States; the U. S. wanted to build anti-communism in Asia, and the economic crisis of Korea. Peace Line proclaimed by Rhee, Syng-man administration, however, prevented normalization accord of two nations; this line had been made to protect Korea coastal fishing ground from Japan's overfishing in that ground. Japan requested the removal of Peace Line very strongly as a prerequisite of Korea-Japan Conference Agreement. While Park, Chung-hee administration recognized the removal of Peace Line was inevitable in the process of negotiation with Japan, the difference between two nations was still very serious from the preliminar stage of Korea-Japan Fisheries Conference. This difference of opinions on Peace Line began to be narrowed down little by little when Kim, Jong-pil, the CIA Director of Korea, and Ohira, the Foreign Minister of Japan, resolved the issues on the right of claims as Korea-Japan Fisheries Conference was in progress. Peace Line in Korean coast used to be a maximum 200-nautical mile exclusive fishing zone, however, as a result of Conference, it fell down into 12-nautical mile exclusive fishing zone as Japan suggested. Also, a joint regulation fishing zone between Korea and Japan was set for the outer of 12-nautical mile exclusive fising zone. Though Korea tried to constitute a system to control Japanese fishing boat in quality within a joint regulation fishing zone and discussed it with Japan, this effort failed to bring agreement with Japan; Japan remained fairly tight-lipped on this issue standing Flaggenprinzip ground. In addition, the amount of loan which Korea required Japan as a return of removal of Peace Line at Korea Japan Fisheries Conference was only $90 million dollors and its redeption conditions was unfavorable for Korea. Nonetherless, the removal of Peace Line was brought not only by Japan' strong request but also by Korea's determined policy since the preliminary stage of the Conference; Park administration wanted to reach an agreement at Korea-Japan Conference and also wanted to introduce money of compensation claims as a result of the Conference. However, against Park administration's unilateral proceeding at Korea-Japan Conference, there was a firm oppressive among parties out of political power and university students inside of Korea. Park administration, however, clamped down on this opposition and finally concluded Korea-Japan agreement. Even after Korea-Japan agreement, there had been perpetual fisheries disputes between Korea and Japan. Japanese fishing boats violated Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement and Korean fishing boats overfished in Japan coastal ground. After all, in 1998, Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement was cancelled due to Japan's one-sided proclaim of discontinuance. The agreement was unfaire to Korean people at the time of agreement and also to Japan people both after the agreement and at the time of cancellation.

美軍政期 對日軍政貿易과 綿紡織産業

서문석 한일경상학회 2021 韓日經商論集 Vol.90 No.-

Purpose: This study examined the impact of the Military Government’s trade with Japan during the U.S. Military Government period (1945.9-1948.8) on South Korea’s cotton textile industry. Through this, we understood the situation of the cotton textile industry, South Korea’s representative sector, and looked at the impact of the U.S. Military Government’s import policy on the cotton textile industry and companies in the South Korea shortly after the collapse of the colonial economy. Research design, data, and methodology: South Korea’s colonial economic system, which had been built around the munitions industry, collapsed when its colonial rule ended. Most factories stopped procuring raw materials and components, and the Japanese-owned company’s operators disappeared. The South Korean economy was paralyzed when workers left the plant that stopped operating. When the Cold War began, the U.S. military government in South Korea expanded its trade with Japan through GHQ. Machinery imported from Japan by the U.S. military government included parts related to cotton spinning. Parts and consumables of cotton spinning facilities imported from Japan were distributed to vested textile factories under the control of the U.S. military government. South Korea’s cotton textile industry, which suffered from a shortage of cotton parts and supplies, repaired a considerable number of facilities in 1947. At that time, representative large-scale vested textile factories began to increase efficiency in terms of facilities, operations, raw materials, and labor. Results: The U.S. military government restored part of the dismantled colonial economic system through military trade with Japan and restored Korea-Japan economic relations. The U.S. military government's move was revealed when the Delegation of Korea to Japan was established and the Korea-Japan trade agreement was signed under the leadership of GHQ in 1949, which eventually contributed to the signing of the Korea-Japan Agreement in 1965. Implications: In conclusion, the military government’s trade between Korea and Japan during the U.S. Military Government period played a role in expanding the colonial economic relationship to after Liberation. In addition, it provided the prototype of the cooperative relationship established by Korean and Japanese companies after the normalization of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan

언론을 통해 본 한일협정 인식 50년

오제연(Oh, je-yeon) 역사비평사 2015 역사비평 Vol.- No.111

This study discusses how the South Korean press has recognized the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement concluded in 1965 and the relation between Korea and Japan on the 10th, 20th, 30th and 40th Anniversaries. During the Post-Cold War era, South Korean newspapers acknowledged that the South Korean economy could develop itself through economic cooperation between Korea and Japan after conclusion of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement on the 10th Anniversary in 1975. However, at the same time, because of an increasing adverse balance in trade between Korea and Japan, South Korea strongly insisted that the existing vertical economic cooperation should be changed to one of horizontal and reciprocal economic cooperation. In 1985, the 20th Anniversary of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement, during the Post-Cold War era, cooperation between South Korea, the U.S. and Japan reached its peak, and relations between Korea and Japan were very friendly. Nevertheless, as it was during the 10th Anniversary, the adverse balance of trade between Korea and Japan continued to be problematic, and concern that the Korean economy might be dependent on Japan"s capital and technologies increased. In particular, university newspapers showed great concern about military dependency represented by the trilateral national security system among South Korea, the U.S. and Japan. In the 1990s, as the Post-Cold War system came to an end and Koreans politically and economically improved greatly, the relationship between Korea and Japan changed to a more horizontal one. Accordingly, in 1995, the 30th Anniversary of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement, the issue of past affairs between Korea and Japan became a significant controversy. Of these, the legitimacy of the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910 was the biggest issue. In summary, the 30th Anniversary of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement was the first year when a war of memory over past relations between Korea and Japan became as serious issue while radical problems of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement were presented. In the 2000s, the relationship between Korea and Japan improved, and in particular, as private exchanges became vitalized, both governments declared 2005, the 40th Anniversary of the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement, as ‘Korea-Japan Friendship Year.’ However, because of Japan"s Provocation over Dokdo Island started in the beginning of the year, Korea-Japan relations cooled rapidly. The conservative media still emphasized the economic and security cooperation between Korea and Japan, but generally, public opinion in South Korea took a firm line on the Japan"s Provocation over Dokdo Island. In addition, the conservative shift in the private sector of Japan expressed on the Internet only heightened Korean people"s anti-Japanese sentiment. This, in turn, caused a vicious circle that would worsen Japanese people"s sentiment of Koreans. Such confrontation and conflict between Korea and Japan was caused by the limitations inherent in the Korea-Japan Treaty and Agreement, neglecting the settlement of past colonialism and insisting only on economic and security cooperation.

법정책학연구논문 ; 한(韓),중(中)자유무역협정(自由貿易協定)(FTA)과반경소(和反傾銷) -한미 FTA와 반덤핑-

이호용 ( Ho Yong Lee ) 한국법정책학회 2014 법과 정책연구 Vol.14 No.4

중국은 2007년부터 한국의 최대 수입대상국이 되었으며, 우리나라도 2013년부터 중국의 최대 수입대상국이 되었다. 또 중국은 2004년 이후 한국의 최대 교역 대상국이 되었다. 무역수지의 경우 한국의 흑자가 증가추세에 있고 이러한 현상은 양국 간 통상 마찰의 주요한 원인이 되고 있으며 중국은 반덤핑조치를 통해 이를 해결하고자 한다. 현재 한국은 중국의 최대 반덤핑규제 대상국으로 중국은 한국 상품에 대해 집중적으로 반덤핑조사를 실시하고 있다. 이로 인하여 한·중 FTA 협상에서도 반덤핑 관련 사항은 중요한 의제로 다루어졌다.이 논문의 목적은 한·중 FTA 협상과 관련하여 반덤핑 관련 쟁점을 파악하고 그에 대한 대응책을 제시하는 측면에서 중국의 반덤핑 법제도의 문제점과 개선방안 및 이를 위한 우리나라 법제도의 보완가능성을 검토하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 Ⅱ장에서는 중국의 한국산 제품에 대한 반덤핑 규제 현황과 한국의 중국산 제품에 대한 반덤핑규제 현황을 살펴보았고, Ⅲ장에서는 한·중 FTA에 대한 한국과 중국의 입장과 한·중 FTA에 대한 추진 배경과 전략 등반펌핑 제도 관련 쟁점과 중국의 반덤핑 조례 등 반덤핑 관련 법제도의 문제점을 분석하였으며, 한국, 중국 및 WTO 협정의 반덤핑 규정을 비교하였다. Ⅳ장에서는 중국과 한국의 반덤핑 관련 법제도의 개선방안을 살펴보았다. 중국 측의 법제도 개선사항으로는 정상가격의 산정기준을 명확히 할 것, 거래단계 등 가격비교에 영향을 주는 요인을 명확히 제시할 것, 덤핑으로 인한 피해를 산정하는데 고려해야 할 요소의 개념을 명확히 할 것, 경미과세원칙을 명문화할 것 등이며, 한국측의 법제도 개선사항으로는 반덤핑 발동을 위한 법제도를 구체화할 것, 반덤핑제도에 의해 보호되는 대상인 국내산업에 대한 기준을 명확히 할 것, 미소 마진과 경미수량인 조사신청의 경우 의무적 조사기각을 수용할 것, 재심에 관한 준용 규정을 둘 것, 보복조치가 발생하지 않도록 사전협의하는 절차를 둘 것 등이다. China has become the maximum income countries of South Korea since 2007, Korea also became a maximum income countries since 2013 in China. In addition, China has become the largest trading countries in South Korea since 2004. In the case of the trade balance, South Korea``s trade surplus is on the rise, this phenomenon is a major source of trade friction between the two countries, China is trying to solve it through the anti-dumping measures. Recently Korea is the maximum anti-dumping regulation countries of China, China has conducted intensive anti-dumping investigation against South Korea deals. Due to this one. Of FTA negotiations in antidumping matters are covered by the agenda. The purpose of this paper is to examine the problems and solutions of China``s anti-dumping legislation and the possibility of complementing our country legal system for identifying relevant issues in relation to anti-dumping in Korea-China FTA negotiations. and in terms of proposed countermeasures for them it. To this end, in Chapter Ⅱ looked at the anti-dumping Regulations for Korean products in China, and the Anti-Dumping Regulations on Chinese-made products in Korea. In chapter Ⅲ, analyzed Korea and China``s stance and push for Korea-China FTA, issues related anti-pumping schemes such as promotion background and strategy, issues of anti-dumping legislation such as China``s anti-dumping regulations and compared Korea, China and the WTO agreements``s anti-dumping provisions. In chapter Ⅳ examined the improvement of anti-dumping legislation in China and South Korea also. In Chinese legislation improvements will also be included clarifying the criteria for calculating normal value, being presented to clarify the factors that influence to price comparison such as transaction steps, clarifying the concept of factors to be considered to estimate the damage caused by dumping, and stipulating a slightly taxation principles etc. Korea``s legal system to be improved are as follows: shaping the legal system for anti-dumping invoked, clarifying the criteria for the domestic industry protected by anti-dumping regime, accommodating mandatory investigation dismiss in case of research application for small margins or minor quantity, keeping the Application of the Provisions relating to appeals, putting a prior consultation procedure avoiding retaliation would have occurred, etc.

국제협상에서의 국내적 제약의 역할

김관옥(Kim, Kwanok) 동아시아국제정치학회 2009 국제정치연구 Vol.12 No.1

The Korea-U.S. beef trade negotiations which had held between January 2006 and June 2008 went through tough and conflictual processes and resulted in more favorable outcomes to South Korea which was weaker than the U.S. What made such processes and outcomes in the Korea-U.S. beef trade negotiations? This paper attempts to define the major factors that determined the processes and outcomes of the negotiations by analyzing Korea-U.S. beef trade negotiations with a two-level game approach which emphasizes both domestic factors like "distribution of preferences and coalition among domestic actors," "public opinion" and "domestic political system" and international factors like "distribution of capabilities among states" and "role of international institutions. The results of the analysis show that processes of the Korea-U.S. beef trade negotiations had to be tough and conflictual because both Korea and the U.S. maintained small size of "win-sets." That means both states did not have not many things to yield to each other. Since the both states announced beef trade agreement on April 18, 2008 which eliminated any kinds of barrier to import all kinds of American beef which many Korean people worry about safety, many powerful social actors in Korean society began to build coalitions and opposed the full opening of Korea beef market to import American beef, and there had been overwhelming public opinion that opposed opening beef market. Those Korean domestic factors drastically reduced "win-sets" size of Korea and enlarged American "win-sets" size, and eventually helped Korea achieve favorable outcome over the U.S. which utilized favorable balance of power with Korea and verification of the international institutions (OIE) about American beef safety to fully open Korean beef market. This case study confirms the arguments of the two-level game approach which emphasizes both international and domestic factors in determining the processes and outcomes of the Korea-U.S. beef trade negotiations.

1900~1940년 왕립아시아학회 한국지부와 서양인들의 한국 연구

이영미 ( Lee Yeong-mi ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2021 한국학연구 Vol.- No.62

1900년 6월 16일 서양인 17명이 서울 유니언(Seoul Union) 독서실에 모여서 왕립아시아학회 한국지부(Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland)(이하 ‘한국지부’로 줄임)를 창립하였다. 한국지부는 1824년 왕의 칙허를 받은 영국 학회의 지부를 표방하였으나 런던보다는 한국에서 활동하던 사람들의 의지로 설립되었고, 다른 지부들과 마찬가지로 본부의 통제를 거의 받지 않으면서 연구발표회를 개최하고 학술지 『한국지부 회보(Transactions of the Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society)』(이하 ‘『회보』’로 줄임)를 간행하였다. 이 단체는 창립 초기 다소 어려움을 겪었으나 1910년대 초 자리를 잡았으며, 태평양 전쟁으로 일제가 미국인 선교사들을 강제 귀국시킬 때까지 약 30년간 국내외 서양인들에 의한 한국 연구의 본진으로 기능하였다. 1947년 12월 18일 소수의 영미권 인사들에 의하여 재조직되어 작년에 창립 120주년을 맞았다. 이 논문은 1940~1940년 한국지부의 초기 역사를 1900~1916년, 1917~1928년, 1929~1940년의 3개 시기로 구분하여 다룬 결과 다음과 같은 고찰을 얻었다. 첫째, 존스(George H. Jones, 1867~1919), 헐버트(Homer B. Hulbert, 1863~1949), 게일(James S. Gale, 1863~1937)이 창립에 중요한 역할을 담당하였다. 특히 게일은 존스와 헐버트가 한국을 떠난 후 한국지부의 정착에 기여하였다. 둘째, 한국 연구에 진정한 열정을 가진 영국국교회 선교사들이 있었다. 트롤로프(Mark N. Trollope, 1862~1930)는 존스, 헐버트, 게일과 마찬가지로 ‘선교사 겸 학자’였던 랜디스(Eli B. Landis, 1865~1898)의 영향으로 한국지부 초창기에 『회보』에 연구 결과를 발표하였다. 그는 1917년 이래 거의 매년 한국지부 회장으로 선출되는 한편 동료 선교사들이 한국을 연구할 수 있도록 돕기도 했다. 셋째, 1920년대 말부터 미국 선교사 2세들이 한국지부를 이끌기 시작하였다. 그 중에서도 노블(Harod J. Noble, 1903~1953)과 맥큔(George M. McCune, 1908~1948)은 한국 연구로 박사 학위를 받고 미국 학계에 진입하였다. 비슷한 시기 천주교 선교사 에카르트(Andreas Eckardt, 1883~1974) 역시 한국 연구로 박사 학위를 받고 독일 한국학의 개척자가 되었다. On June 16th, 1900, seventeen Western people gathered at the reading room, Seoul Union, and founded the Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (Korea Branch). It was established as a branch of the British academic association which received its charter in 1824, but its founding fathers were residents in Korea, rather than those in London. They held regular meetings for research presentation and published Transactions of the Korea Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (Transactions). They barely received intervention of the headquarters. It settled in the early 1910s after some difficulty, and had been the center of Korean studies for about thirty years until the Japanese forced American missionaries to leave Korea. It was reestablished by a few American and British people on December 18th, 1947. Last year saw its 120th year. This article reviews the early history of the Korea Branch between 1900 and 1940, and divides it into three stages (1900-1916, 1917-1928 and 1929- 1940). First, George H. Jones (1867-1919), Homer B. Hulbert (1863-1949) and James S. Gale (1863-1937) had a major role in its foundation. Especially, Gale contributed to its settlement after Jones and Hulbert left Korea. Secondly, some Anglican missionaries had a real enthusiasm for Korean studies. Under the influence Eli B. Landis (1865-1898), missionary and scholar like Jones, Hulbert and Gale, Mark N. Trollope (1862-1930) published his research to Transactions in the initial period. He had been elected as president almost every year since 1917, and helped his colleagues study Korea. Finally, in the end of 1920s, second generation of American missionaries in Korea started leading the Korea Branch. Among them, Harold J. Noble (1903-1953) and George M. McCune (1908-1948) got a doctor’s degree in Korean studies and entered the world of academia in the United States. Around the same time, Andreas Eckardt (1883-1974), Catholic missionary, got a doctor’s degree as well and became a pioneer in Korean studies in Germany.