한중 근대소설과 만주

장뢰(Zhang Lei) 한국비평문학회 2013 批評文學 Vol.- No.48

한중 양국의 근대문학은 모두 만주라는 지리적 장소를 배경으로 당시대에 노출된 만주 문제를 유형화하고 있다. 동일한 지리적 공간이 설정되어 있다고 해더라도 한국소설과 중국소설에 투영된 만주는, 그리고 그곳에 정착해 살아가는 상대 민족에 대한 시선은 사뭇 다르게 나타났다. 만주는 조선인들에게 더욱 복잡한 의미망을 지니고 있다지만 동시에 수많은 평범한 조선인에게 만주는 조선에서의 일방적인 피식민지인의 지위에서 벗어나 마음껏 농사를 지을 수 있는 ‘희망의 공간"이었다. 만주국 건국 후에 발표된 작품에서는 대체로 조선인의 ‘대륙 개척"과 ‘만주 정착"의 강렬한 욕망이 발견한다. 반면 대부분 중국인에게 만주국은 악몽으로 인식된다. 만주국은 일본의 또 다른 식민지이자 ‘괴뢰국"(傀儡國), ‘위만주국"(僞滿洲國)이라 지칭할 뿐이다. 이런 만주국에 대한 중국인 작가들의 사유는 그들의 작품으로 하여금 결국 ‘만주 해방"을 향한 강렬한 욕망을 반사하게 만든다. 한국소설에서 나오는 중국인 형상은 부정적 형상과 긍정적 형상으로 볼 수 있다. 만주정착에 가장 큰 걸림돌은 원주민의 행패와 착취다. 따라서 만주라는 공간뿐만 아니라 중국인 또한 부정적 이미지로 묘사되고 있다. 그리고 생존의 위협을 느끼고 조선인 타자에 대해 경계의 시선을 보내면서 조선인을 습격하는 중국농민 형상도 나온다. 중국인에 대한 극정적인 이미지가 없는 것은 아니지만 있으나 극히 제한적인 숫자이다. 중국소설에서의 한국인은 불쌍한 형상 또는 부정적인 형상으로 나타나는데 항일영웅으로 등장하는 것이 주류이다. 중국인 작가가 조선인을 ‘동반자 타자"로 인식한 것은 단지 만주의 해방을 위한 일시적 이해관계를 위하여 조선인의 힘을 빌리고자 한 것은 아니었다. 함께 힘을 모아 백성을 억압하고 착취하는 봉건주의와 제국주의를 저항하고자 하는 의도를 여겨질 수 있다. Both Korean and Chinese modern novels are set in Manchuria, and describe various problems of that Era. Although they are based on the same space and background, but the descriptions of Manchuria in Korean novels and Chinese novels are different, because people from two countries hold different attitudes toward each other. Manchuria to Korean people has complex meaning. For common Korean people, Manchuria is a ‘space of hope’, which may help them gain their independence from the colonial rule and live a magnificent life. We can find Korean people’s strong desire to settle in Manchuria in Korean novels after Machuria’s establishment. Whereas for most Chinese people, Manchuria is their nightmare, and they view Manchuria as a puppet state, which is just another colony of Japan. The desire of ‘liberating Manchuria’ is reflected in Chinese writers’ works. In Korean novels, the image of Chinese people can be divided into a positive image and negative image. The biggest problem for settle down Manchuria is the extort of indigene. So, whether Manchuria or Manchuria people mentionged in Chinese novels with negative image. At the same time, when the Manchuria people feel Survival of the threatened, they began to attack Korean. Although positive image of Chinese people mentioned, but few. In Chinese novels, the image of the Korean is poor, compassionate, also with negative image. But emerged as the hero of the anti-Japanese mainstream. The Chinese writers consider the Korean people as their ‘companions’, and want to resist the oppressive feudalism and imperialism with them together, not just want to got the power from Korean.

1920년대 在滿韓人社會主義者들의 항일투쟁 노선 변화

박순섭 한국민족운동사학회 2017 한국민족운동사연구 Vol.0 No.90

By the late 1920s, the movement political lines of Chinese Communist Party and the Comintern of the Soviet Union moved sharply to the left. So Manchuria-Korean socialists were forced to reject the Nationalist forces and join the Chinese Communist Party. It is noteworthy that Manchuria-Korean socialists responded to these instructions in a wide variety of ways. This was due to the socio-economic differences between the Manchuria regions, to which each Manchuria-Korean socialist group or individual belongs. First, in the East Manchuria area, which is the activity area of the ML Faction socialists group, Korean immigration was the fastest. In addition, since the main product, soybeans, was commodity crops exported to international markets, rural class differentiation and the penetration of Japanese speculative capital accelerated. As a result, the distinction between landlord and tenant is made clear within the same Manchuria-Korean community, and the class contradictions that have been brought up as a ground task above the national contradiction. With that in mind, ML Faction's struggle political lines led to the rejection of Manchuria-bourgeoisie. It also concluded in the participation of Anti-Imperialist League activities through active connection of the Chinese Communist Party. On the other hand, South-North Manchuria, a region where the Seoul-Shanghai Faction and Hwayo Faction socialists group were active, has been inflowed of Koreans since the late 1910s. Their National Consciousness, which suffered from the discriminatory rule of Japan, was powerful. Moreover, South-North Manchuria has had a strong influence over the will of national liberation and national contradiction because the self-sufficient agrarian economic system dominated by rice farmers continued. The Seoul-Shanghai Faction and the Hwayo Faction socialists group have maintained the policy of maintaining the concept of extended Korea in Manchuria, reflecting these socio-economic characteristics, and continued the campaign to make national liberation a top priority. Thus, Manchuria-Korean socialists of the 1920s established a movement political lines that faithfully reflects the socio-economic conditions of the Manchurian region of which they are based. This was actualized by various responses to the dismantling of the Chosen Communist Party and forced pushing of the move sharply to the left. And the attempt to rebuild the Chosen Communist Party continued. Following the joining of the Chinese Communist Party of Manchuria-Korean socialists, Korean activism and domestic revolutionary aid continued within the Party and Northeast anti-Japan allied forces. 1920년대 후반에 이르러 소련의 코민테른과 중국공산당의 운동노선이 급격히 좌경화 되었다. 이에 재만한인사회주의자들에게 민족주의 세력의 배척과 중국공산당 합류가 강요된다. 이때 그에 대한 재만한인사회주의자들의 반응과 대응 방법은 매우 다양하게 전개되었다. 그 원인은 한인사회주의그룹 내지는 개인이 속한 만주 권역간의 사회경제적 차이였다. 먼저 ML파 사회주의 그룹의 활동 영역인 동만 지역의 경우 한인의 이주가 가장 빨랐다. 게다가 주된 생산물인 콩이 국제시장에 수출되는 상품작물이었으므로 농촌 계급분화와 일제 투기자본의 침투가 가속화되었다. 이로인해 같은 재만한인 내에서도 지주와 소작인의 구분이 명확해졌고 그로인한 계급모순이 민족모순 이상의 지상 과제로 대두되었다. 이를 감안한 ML파의 투쟁노선은 재만부르주아지세력의 배척과 중국공산당과의 적극적인 연계를 통한 反제국주의 운동 참여로 귀결되었다. 반면에 서울­상해파 및 화요파 사회주의 그룹이 활동한 권역인 남ㆍ북만주 지역에는 상대적으로 늦은 시기인 1910년대부터 한인들이 유입되었다. 일제의 차별적 통치에 시달렸던 이주 한인들의 민족의식은 강력했다. 더욱이 남ㆍ북만주에선 논농사 위주의 자급자족적 농업 경제체제가 지속되었기 때문에 민족해방 의지와 민족모순의 영향력이 컸다. 서울­상해파와 화요파 사회주의 그룹은 이러한 사회경제적 특징을 반영해 조선연장주의 방침을 유지하고 민족해방을 최우선의 목표로 삼는 운동 노선을 지속했다. 이처럼 1920년대의 재만한인사회주의자들은 자신들이 근거지로 삼는 만주권역의 사회경제적 조건을 충실히 반영한 운동노선을 수립해 나갔다. 이는 조선공산당 해체와 좌경노선 강요에 대한 다양한 대응과 조선공산당 재건설 시도로 실제화 되었다. 재만한인사회주의자들의 중국공산당 합류 이후에도 중국공산당과 동북항일연군 내부에서 한인들의 독자적인 활동과 국내 운동 원조가 지속되었다.

한국 개신교회의 만주 선교 담론 : 1945년 이전을 중심으로

박형신 21세기기독교사회문화아카데미 2025 신학과 사회 Vol.39 No.1

이 논문은 대한제국(1897-1910) 및 일제 강점기(1910-1945)의 한국 개신교회 만주선교(滿洲宣敎) 담론(談論)을 사회적 맥락과 함께 분석함으로 당시의 한국교회와 만주선교의 상황을이해하고 오늘의 선교 및 목회적 실천에 도움을 주는 것을 목적으로 한다. 시대적 구분은1900 년 전후부터 1910 년대까지, 1920 년대, 1930 년대부터 1945 년까지의 3 시기로 나누어진행되었다. 1910 년대까지는 주로 미국 및 캐나다 선교사들에 의해, 만주에 한인이 이주하므로그들을 위한 선교 활동을 펼칠 뿐만 아니라 만주선교지부를 설치해야 한다는 담론이 일어났다. 흥미롭게도, 만주 한인을 위한 선교 활동은 동시에 중국 복음화를 위해 최선의 선교 자원을 준비시키는 것이라는 담론도 펼쳐졌다. 1920 년대에는 간도참변 등 만주 한인과 교회에 대한 수많은 고난과 참화 소식이 전해졌고, 만주에 파송된 목회자들을 통하여 여전히 척박한 사회 환경속에서 인적 및 물적 지원을 요청하는 담론이 형성되었다. 이 시기에 전통적인 사경회뿐만 아니라 보다 대중적이고 초교파적 형태의 교회 집회인 부흥회와 관련된 기사들도 등장하였다. 1930 년대에는, 만주사변으로 남만철도 일대에서 일어난 참화와 동만주에서 발생한 대학살 가운데에서 도움을 요청하는 담론이 지속되었다. 다른 한편, 점차 만주 한인교회의 토대와 조직이마련되고 한반도의 교회 지도자들이 만주에 자주 왕래하게 되면서 한국 개신교의 언론에는 만주기행문이 만주교회와 사회의 모습을 전달하고 만주에 대한 일정한 기대감을 조성하는 흐름으로자리잡았다. 당시 만주국에 만연했던 아편 등의 사회문제 속에서, 아편을 들여온 서양인의동아시아 선교를 비판하고 조선인에 의한 ‘대동(大東)전도’를 강조하는 견해도 나타났다. This paper aims to analyze the discourse of the Korean Protestant Church's missionary work in Manchuria during the Korean Empire (1897-1910) and the Japanese colonial period (1910-1945) along with the social context, in order to understand the situation of the Korean Church and the missionary work in Manchuria at that time and to help with missionary work and pastoral practice today. The period is divided into three periods: from around 1900 to the 1910s, the 1920s, and the 1930s to 1945. Until the 1910s, there was a discourse, mainly by American and Canadian missionaries, that missionary work should be carried out for Koreans immigrating to Manchuria, and that a mission station in Manchuria should be established. What is interesting is that there was also a discourse that missionary work targeting Koreans in Manchuria was simultaneously preparing the best missionary resources for evangelizing China. In the 1920s, news of numerous hardships and disasters suffered by Koreans and churches in Manchuria, including the Kando Massacre, spread, and through pastors sent to Manchuria, a discourse was formed asking for human and material support in the still harsh social environment. During this period, articles appeared relating to revival meetings, a more popular and interdenominational form of church gathering as well as traditional Bible institutes. In the 1930s, amid the devastation caused by the Manchurian Incident along the South Manchuria Railway and the massacre that occurred in East Manchuria, calls for help continued. On the other hand, as the foundation and organization of the Korean church in Manchuria gradually became established and church leaders from the Korean peninsula began to frequently travel to Manchuria, travelogues about Manchuria became established in the Korean Protestant press as a way to convey the image of the Manchurian church and society and to create a certain level of expectation about Manchuria. Amidst the social problems of opium and other diseases that were rampant in Manchukuo at the time, there was also an opinion that criticized the missionary work of Westerners who brought opium into East Asia and emphasized the ‘missionary work for Greater East Asia’ by Koreans.

해방이후 시에 재현된 만주의 기억

김영주 우리문학회 2019 우리文學硏究 Vol.0 No.61

The literary people of Joseon comprised the group of emigrants who headed to Manchuria dreaming of a situation different from that in colonial Joseon. Apart from political and economic intentions, the most important reason for their migration to Manchuria was their quest for papers to publish their works written in Korean. Magazines and newspapers could be published in Korean because Manchukuo had formally proclaimed multicultural governance. Therefore, migrant poets could freely compose their works in Manchuria. There are many studies that have discussed poems written in Manchuria prior to Liberation. Because studies that discussed poems written in Manchuria mostly focused on the period prior to Liberation, this study aimed to examine the trend of poetry after Liberation. First, differences in poems related to emotions in Manchuria between the times prior to and after Liberation were examined. Poets in Manchuria prior to Liberation imbued diverse experiences into the image of Manchuria by expressing frustration or anger toward human conditions, singing about the liveliness of the modern city civilization, and withdrawing into the inner world as strangers. Poets after Liberation changed their habitats by returning to South Korea and North Korea or residing in the Yanbian area. With the change in the situation, their works recalling reminiscences of Manchuria changed from those in the past. Poets, such as Yu Chi-hwan, Pak Par-yang, Baek Seok, and Kim Jogyu, who created their own literary world in South Korea and North Korea remembered Manchuria as the place where the anti-Japan independence movement had occurred. Having witnessed the political mudslinging of South Korea, Yu Chi-hwan criticized the state of affairs by recreating Manchuria as an innocent space of youths who worried about the security of their country and dreamed of a bright future. As Pak Par-yang, Baek Seok, and Kim Jogyu were forced to write only about works that praised the dictatorship of North Korea, they restructured Manchuria with the anti-Japan independence struggle of Kim Il-sung. Lee Wook, a poet of the subsequent generation who stayed in the Yanbian area, transformed Manchuria into a land of peace and coexistence based on the perspectives of an ethnic Korean living in China after Liberation. By breaking away from the pressure of imperialism and the sorrow of ethnic discrimination, he inscribed his love for a second home into the image of Manchuria. Seo Jeong-ju, who led the literary circle of South Korea after Liberation, wrote a New Year’s poem that instigated the feeling of expanding the territory to Vladivostok and Manchuria. In the same year, the military dictatorial government decided to send troops to Vietnam. Seo Jeong-ju reminisced Manchuria as the tenacity for ambition, using pro-government expressions in many of his works. As examined in this study, the memory of Manchuria after Liberation was reproduced differently according to the realistic stance of poets. It was reconfirmed that poems reflect controversial social issues by projecting the manner in which poets respond to reality. The reason for such variation of lifestyles of poets after Liberation can be inferred from the fact that poets sharing the same experience reproduce their memory in their own ways. The memory of Manchuria retained by the poets serves as an important medium that leads to such conclusions. 식민지 조선과는 다른 상황을 꿈꾸며 만주로 떠난 이주민 대열 속에는 조선의 문인들도 섞여 있었다. 그들이 만주행을 결심한 이유에는 정치적, 경제적 목적도 있었겠지만 무엇보다 조선어로 쓴 작품을 발표할 지면이 필요하였기 때문이다. 만주국은 형식적으로나마 다민족의 협치를 공표하고 있었기에 조선어 잡지와 신문의 발행이 가능하였다. 이주한 시인들은 자유롭게 작품을 써나갔으며 이들의 시를 논의한 연구도 그간 여러 방면으로 진행되어 왔다. 만주에서 쓴 시에 관한 논문들은 해방이전까지에 집중되어 있어서 해방이후의 경향도 살펴볼 필요가 있다는 점에서 이 연구는 출발하였다. 우선적으로 만주의 정서를 노래하는 시들이 해방 전후라는 시기변화에 따라 달라지는 양상은 없는지를 살펴보고자 하였다. 해방이전 재만 시인들은 만주의 인간실태에 실망하여 좌절하고 분노하는 심사를 표현하거나 근대도시문명의 발랄함을 노래하거나 이방인으로서의 내면세계에 침잠하는 등 실로 다양한 경험치를 만주이미지에 담아내었다. 해방이후 시인들은 남과 북으로 귀환하거나 연변지역에 계속하여 거류함으로써 삶의 터전을 달리하게 되었다. 기억 속의 만주를 작품화하는 경우 앞 시기와는 상당히 다른 면모를 보여주게 된다는 사실을 확인할 수 있었다. 남과 북에서 각각의 작품세계를 구가하게 된 유치환, 박팔양, 백석, 김조규 등은 만주를 항일독립운동지역으로 기억하게 된다. 남한의 정치적 이전투구를 목도한 유치환은 만주를 우국지사의 공간으로 재탄생시킨다. 북한의 유일주체사상을 지지하는 작품만을 쓸 수 있는 상황에서 박팔양, 백석, 김조규가 재구하는 만주의 모습은 김일성 항일독립투쟁사로 결집된다. 연변지역에 남은 이민후속세대 리욱은 해방이후 중국조선족의 입장을 견지하며 평화와 공존의 땅으로서 만주일대를 작품화한다. 그는 제국주의의 압박에서 벗어나 타민족배척의 서러움을 뒤로하고 제2의 고향에 뿌리내리게 된 지역사랑을 만주이미지에 새겨 넣는다. 해방이후 남한 문단중심에 서게 된 서정주는 블라디보스토크와 만주로 뻗어나가자는 신년시를 쓰게 되는데 그 해는 군사독재정권에 의해 베트남파병이 결정되던 시기다. 다수의 작품에서 체제 지향적 발언을 하던 그는 야망을 위한 집념으로 만주를 기억한다. 해방이후 만주의 기억은 시인들이 현실에서 처한 위치에 따라 다르게 재현되고 있다는 사실을 확인할 수 있었다. 시인의 현실대응양식이 시에 투영되며 또한 시가 사회의 문제양상을 반영한다는 사실을 다시 한 번 추론하게 되었다. ‘재만’이라는 같은 경험을 공유한 시인들이 과거의 기억을 완전히 다르게 재구하는 사실을 통하여 해방이후 이들의 삶도 달라질 수밖에 없었음을 유추할 수 있었다. 만주의 기억은 이러한 결론을 도출하도록 하는 중요한 매개로 작용하였다.

김만선의 만주서사: 해방직후, 재만조선인, 만주의 중층적 현실 <이중국적>, <한글강습회>, <압록강>, <귀국자>를 중심으로

고명철 ( Myeong Cheol Ko ) 한민족문화학회 2015 한민족문화연구 Vol.50 No.-

The collapse of Manchuria emerges liberation from the rule of Japanese colonialism. What we study on the reality of Manchuria after emancipation is important. It does not only open the other`s road to understand the order of colonial rule but also provides us with a chance to overcome the colonialism. Regarding this, we should approach in detail to the reality of Manchuria immediately after liberation. I inspected the life of Chosun people living Manchuria facing on Manchuria`s complicated multilayer problems as I focus on Manchuria narration among Kim Man-Sun`s works in terms of three problematics. The first, Kim Man-Sun`s <Dual Nationality(이중국적)>, <Amnokkang (압록강)> show the chaotic reality of which Manchuria was broken due to the defeat of Japan through the eye of Chosun people living Manchuria. So, I checked we should not statically Chinese violence towards Chosun people living Manchuria. When we do understand what Russia intervention Manchuria evoked the National Party to conquer the zone around Manchuria`s huge cities is related to the Chinese violence for Chosun people living Manchuria, we can profoundly Kim Man-Sun`s works. The second, I inspected the anti-modern aspect of Manchuria`s modern civilization showing in chaos immediately after emancipation. Kim Man-Sun shows sharply what Manchuria`s modernism, experimented the method of empire`s rule, is a distant from modern civilization`s buildung, and then the material desire decorated Manchuria colonial management seems to be appeared the disgust material desire`s real face spotted with both disorder and chaos due to Manchuria`s collapse. This is his critical consciousness on the truth of which Manchuria modernism is dominated by a Fetishism of colonial rule power. The third, this critical consciousness is connected on Chosun people living Manchuria`s self-criticism and self-reflection on collaboration with such power. This seems clearly to represent in <Remigrant(귀국자)>. Above all, what it represents the accurate reality of Chosun people living Manchuria who collaborates with Manchuria colonial management, and what it criticizes accomplish the given-power of independent country by using colonial rule power`s legacy in a unstable homeland immediately emancipation, emerges that what it tries to rebirth on new subject with self-moral to keep a sincere independence is not easy.

일제의 만주침략과 간도참변

조원기(Cho Won-Ki) 독립기념관 한국독립운동연구소 2012 한국독립운동사연구 Vol.0 No.41

Kando disastrous accident was occurred from October 1920 to May 1921, as a case for killing thousands of Koreans by about 20,000 Japanese troops in the area. Kando disastrous accident showed cruelness of Japan's imperialism invasion. Reinvestigating Kando disastrous accident as a Japanese invasion of Manchuria macroscopic analysis and reality of Japanese troops in Kando disastrous accident are can be the subject of research. Kando disastrous accident was not just crackdown on anti-Japanese movement but also a big framework Japanese invasion. In other words, Kando disastrous accident was genocide under invasion of Manchuria plan not just a military aggression for destruction of the Korean society. Japan promoted invasion of Manchuria step by step to achieve imperialism after Russo-Japanese War in 1905 for domination of Manchuria. Kando Convention in 1909, over two Russo-Japanese Conventions 1907, 1912, "Treaty on South Manchuria and eastern Inner Mongolia," in 1915 was showed a gradual strategy for invasion of Manchuria. Installation of the Kwantung Army and Joseon Army installed two divisions was the strengthening of its forces for the invasion of Manchuria. China's situation to the upside here, the Japanese invasion of Siberia, in collusion with Japanese and Chang Tso-Lin in Manchuria was opportunity to concur the Japanese invasion of Manchuria. Japanese invasion of Kando happened in this background was a processed thorough military plan. August 1920 to the so-called "genocide plan of Korean in Kando" to establish, 19th infantry division of Joseon Army, Kwantung Army, Japanese Army of Siberia and Japanese Army of north Manchuria was preparing for its invasion in August and September 1920. In the process 19th infantry division of Joseon Army illegally invaded North Kando. Japanese Army of Siberia and Japanese Army of north Manchuria were involved in this massacre. Kwantung Army invaded West Kando and massacred Korean. In addition, the Japanese was intended to prepare for invading of Manchuria through testing the power of Joseon Army and experience accumulated by cooperation with Kwantung Army, Japanese Army of Siberia and Japanese Army of north Manchuria. The purpose of Japanese invasion in Kando was dissolution of the existing Korean community and slaughter of Korean. Ultimately, however, Japanese Army of Korean massacre was to secure a foothold for invasion of Manchuria. After the sacrifices of the Korean society, society of Kando was totally changed, forward base of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria. 간도참변은 1920년 10월부터 1921년 5월까지 간도 일대에서 일본군이 약 2만 명의 병력으로 한인 수 천명을 학살한 대 참변이었다. 일본 제국주의의 침략성과 잔혹성을 상징적으로 드러내는 간도참변은, 한인 학살 이라는 차원뿐 아니라 일제의 만주침공이라는 거시적 틀에서 재 규명할 필요가 있다. 즉 간도참변은 간도지역 한인과 항일운동에 대한 학살 및 탄압에 그치지 않고 일제의 대륙침략을 위한 과정에서 감행된 것이었다. 제국주의 팽창의 야욕을 불태우던 일제는 1905년 러일전쟁 이후 단계적으로 만주침략을 추진해 나갔다. 1907년 1차 러일협약, 1909년 간도협약, 1910년 2차 러일협약을 비롯하여 1915년 「남만주 및 동부 내몽고에 관한 조약」 등은 만주침략을 위한 일제의 단계적 전략을 보여주는 것이었다. 거기에 관동군 설치와 함께 1916년 한국에 2개 사단을 설치했던 군비 증강은 만주침공을 위한 군사력 강화였다. 이러한 일제의 군비 증강은 만주지역의 무력 침공에 대비한 전략적 준비이기도 했다. 여기에 혼란한 중국의 정세, 일본군의 시베리아 침공, 만주를 둘러싼 일제와 장작림과의 야합 등은 일제의 만주침략을 위한 호재로 작용하고 있었다. 일제의 간도침공은 철저한 군사계획 차원에서 진행되었다. 1920년 8월 소위 「간도지방불령선인초토계획」을 수립한 일제는 1920년 8월과 9월, 조선군 19사단과 포조 파견군, 북만주파견군, 관동군을 동원하며 침공을 감행해 갔다. 조선군 19사단은 북간도 지역을 불법 침공하였고, '포조 파견군'과 북만주 파견대 등도 북간도 지역 한인 학살에 가담하였다. 관동군은 서간도 지역을 침공하여 한인들을 대량 학살하였다. 일본군의 간도 침공의 1차 목적은 기존의 한인 사회를 해체하고 한인 학살에 그 목적이 있었다. 그러나 그 과정에서 일제는 상주군인 조선군의 위력을 시험하고 포조파견군 및 북만주파견대와 협동작전을 펼침으로써 후에 있을 만주침공에 대한 군사적 경험을 쌓으려 하였다. 궁극적으로 일본군의 한인 학살은 일제의 만주침략의 교두보 확보를 위한 전초전과 다름 아니었으며, 1932년 만주국을 세우기 위해 만주에 대한 일제의 군사적 지배력을 대외에 과시한 것이었다. 결국, 간도 참변은 일본 제국주의의 만주침략 구도 속에서 벌어진 만행이었고, 역사적 비극이었다. 일제는 이의 실현을 위해 간도를 그 전초 기지로 삼았고, 이에 간도의 한인들은 일본 제국주의에 의해 희생되었던 것이다.

일제시기 만주 개념의 역사성과 부정성

전성현 ( Sung Hyun Jeon ) 동아대학교 석당학술원 2010 석당논총 Vol.0 No.47

In process of colonialization, Chosun people were continued to unavoidably emigrate to Manchuria, so ideas of colonial intellectual were taken concrete shape surrounding Manchuria. First, Manchuria that realized a national place of exile to a vast wilderness as mere geographical term, begun to imaginative regard as Chosun. In such process, national perspective, regarding Manchuria as chosun`s territory in expanded Imaginary identification, begun to taken place. Meanwhile, in Manchuria national conflict begun to regard Manchuria as Chosun where was a place of national ordeal. Especially, such perspective was expanded for Manbosan affair(萬寶山事件). so the concept of Manchuria was fixed to regard Manchuria as Chosun where was a place of national ordeal. Chosun residents in Manchuria was at center of such conceptualization. But, in September, 1931 the Manchurian Incident and establishment of Manchukuo shifted from existing image of the concept of Manchuria to something else. There was utopian perspective toward civilization and pioneer. There has much of aspect conception be inspire real than real aspect. Therefore, gradually internalized colonialism, intellectuals begun to be strongly show imperialism perspective, and had stand for capitalist in front. In this point, Chosun residents in Manchuria who had performed a cental role of conceptualization, were excluded from discussion. Once again, there was achieved the change of the concept surrounding Manchuria. Particularly, into a whirlpool of war about 1940, there were shown another change of the concep to think of Manchuria in internationalism aspect, not nationalism and imperialism aspect. Above all, National concord that has purposed to make Manchuria to Heaven of Righteous government, don`t only restrictive but also ingenuous idea. But it was meaning in intellectuals of colonial Chosun that was not only maintained nation but also be could changed ideology to internationalism through cooperation and collaboration with nation. Especially, it was that emphasis on autonomism, if it was embodied autonomy of five nations, cooperation and collaboration between nations were possible to change to internationalism.

한국병합 전후 일본 지식인의 만한경영에 대한 인식 : 관련 잡지의 논설을 중심으로

최혜주 한국근현대사학회 2017 한국 근현대사 연구 Vol.82 No.-

There existed various discourses about Japanese intellects’ recognition on Manchuria-Korea management from around the Russo-Japanese War up to the outbreak of the 1st World War in the 1910’s. Through research on those discourses, this author examines not only the Japanese government but the private sector’s aspiration over the advancement into Chosun and also the continent. Since they had experience as a consulate or student overseas, they had keen interest in ‘Manchuria-Korea’, and they were political, too, as they were previously a member of the House of Representatives as well. First of all, before the analysis, focusing on Manchuria-Korea management emerging after the victory of the Russo-Japanese War, this researcher has studied how the Exchange between Manchuria and Korea appeared before the Russo-Japanese War as history prior to it. Before the Russo-Japanese War, in Japan, there were discourses actively expressed around the Exchange between Manchuria and Korea while they were alert about Russia. Within the atmosphere that the Exchange between Manchuria and Korea was regarded as ‘the enemy of the state’, discourse about the possible outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War was popularly presented, and instead of the Exchange between Manchuria and Korea, discourse about England-Japan alliance was being established while the Japanese government carried out the Russo-Japanese Wars decisively. Controversies around the Exchange between Manchuria and Korea did imply “the intention to withdraw Russian troops from Manchuria and conquer Chosun” after all. Next, after the Russo-Japanese War, discourse about Manchuria-Korea management developed into one that insisted on the necessity of immigration into Chosun and management over Manchuria as part of colonizing Chosun. After the Annexation of Chosun, in Japan, they stressed the necessity of management over management along with immigration into Chosun in order to advance into the continent and resolve shortage of food attributed to the increase of population in Japan. Immigration into Chosun was sought as a means to develop and manage Chosun, and to realize that, they deemed it would be crucial to promote research on the state of Chosun, implantation of native farmers into Chosun, and exploitation over colonization projects by the private sector. Concerning the attraction of immigrants, there were a lot of discussions and criticisms over governor Derauchi’s immigration policy. Regarding Japan’s management over Manchuria, they pointed out such problems as failure in the Dongcheock project, lost fever on immigration into Manchuria, and pessimism about immigration into Manchuria; however, mostly, they thought it was important to expand the Japanese Empire. They did support Manchuria-Korea immigration and management like that because they intended to justify their invasive policy to secure the grounds for the fact that the Japanese Empire was trying to build up practical control over Chosun and Manchuria. 러일전쟁 전후부터 1910년대의 제1차 세계대전 발발 이전까지 일본 지식인의 만한경영 인식에 대해 다양한 담론이 등장하였다. 이 담론 연구를 통해 일본정부만이 아니라 민간에서의 조선 진출 및 대륙 진출에 대한 열망을 살펴보았다. 이들은 해외 유학 혹은 해외 영사관 부임 경험이 있으므로 ‘만한’에 대한 관심이 높았으며 중의원의원 경험이 있는 등 정치성을 띠고 있었다. 먼저 러일전쟁 승리 후에 등장하는 만한경영론에 초점을 맞추어 분석하기 전에 그 前史로서 러일전쟁 이전 만한교환론이 등장하는 과정부터 살펴보았다. 일본에서는 러일전쟁 이전에는 러시아를 경계하면서 만한교환론을 중심으로 활발한 담론이 개진되었다. 만한교환론이 ‘國賊’으로 간주되는 분위기에서 러일개전론이 유행하고 만한교환론 대신에 영일동맹론이 성립되면서 일본정부는 러일전쟁을 단행했다. 만한교환에 대한 논란은 결국 “러시아를 만주에서 철병시키고 조선 점령을 준비하자”는 의도를 내포한 것이다. 다음 러일전쟁 이후에는 만한경영론이 조선을 식민지로 만들기 위한 일환의 하나로 조선이주와 만주경영의 필요성을 주장하는 담론으로 발전했다. 일본에서는 조선을 강점한 이후에 일본의 인구증가에 따른 식량부족과 대륙진출을 위해 조선이주와 함께 만주경영의 필요성이 강조되었다. 조선이주는 조선을 개발 경영하기 위한 방편에서 모색되었으며 이를 위해 조선사정 연구, 모국농민의 조선이식, 민간에 의한 식민사업 개척을 추진하는 것이 중요하다고 보았다. 아울러 이주민을 유인하는 방법에 대한 다양한 논의와 데라우치 총독의 이주정책에 대한 비판이 제기되었다. 일본의 만주경영에 대해서는 동척 사업이 실패한 점, 만주이주 열기가 식은 점, 만주이주를 비관적으로 보는 점 등을 지적하고 있으나 대체로 일본제국의 팽창을 위해 중요하다는 인식이다. 이렇게 만한이주 및 경영을 내세운 것은 일제가 조선과 만주에 실질적 지배를 구축할 수 있는 기반을 확보하기 위한 침략정책의 방편이었다.

일제강점기 망명 관련 가사에 나타난 만주의 장소성

고순희 ( Soon Hee Ko ) 한국시가학회 2013 韓國 詩歌硏究 Vol.34 No.-

This study has set the purpose in searching the placeness of Manchuria sown in the exile related lyrics during the Japanese occupation. All writers of ``Manchuria Exile Gasas`` and ``Gasas of the Homeland People Who Have Exiles In Manchuria`` are women of independence activist families except for Kim Dae Rak. We have specifically examined on how the women of independence activist families have perceived the place called Manchuria. In the ``Manchuria Exile Gasas``, the placeness of Manchuria is shown as ``a place where dream of independence is wandering`` and ``a place of opportunity``. The writers have wandered around Manchuria as they aspired the independence of their homeland just like the male independence activists. Meanwhile, young female writers have also considered Manchuria as a place of opportunity to participate in the society. In the ``Gasas of the Homeland People Who Have Exiles in Manchuria``, the placeness of Manchuria is shown as ``a place where the meaning of leaving for independence movement remains`` and ‘a place people want to go to``. The writers respected the independence movement spirit of their husband or father and thought Manchuria as a place where the noble significance of their blood relatives remains. And all writers wanted to go to Manchuria. But since they couldn`t go there even if they wanted to, a regret toward the situation of women had also revealed. In the placeness of Manchuria shown in the exile related lyrics during the Japanese occupation, the key aspect is the fact that the writers have perceived Manchuria as the ``historical place of the race``. But the writers were excessively concentrated on this fact. So the Manchuria as a personal place having concreteness of daily life was not revealed for the most part in their work. And the reason why young female writers could consider Manchuria as a place of opportunity was because they moved to a historical place called Manchuria by escaping from the daily area of women fir the first time. Meanwhile, while the exiled writers have not described the heart of wanting to return to the homeland, the writers who have exiles repeatedly expressed the heart of wanting to go to Manchuria. This fact could also be considered as being originated from the fact that the writers have perceived Manchuria as ``the historical place of the race``.

만주사변 이후 화교배척과 조선 민족주의 운동

박정현(朴正鉉) 중국근현대사학회 2014 중국근현대사연구 Vol.63 No.-

In Chosun, a movement for Koreans in Manchuria triggered the overseas Chinese exclusion and connected to a Chosun nationalist movement. In 1927 and 1931, two cases of the overseas Chinese exclusion were systematically caused by the Chosun nationalist camp. After the Manchurian Incident, the Chosun nationalist camp tried to establish a single representative organization of an ethnic group under the uncertain situation. To achieve this, they planned to use the overseas Chinese exclusion. This article is one of sequential analysis articles on cases of the overseas Chinese exclusion in 1920s and 1930s. The present article investigates how a Koreans in Manchuria relief movement was connected to the overseas Chinese exclusion after the outbreak of the Manchurian Incident in 1931 and also the effect on the formation and deconstruction of ‘the Council for Disaster of Korean in Manchuria’. After the outbreak of the Manchurian Incident, the persecution of Chinese for Koreans in Manchuria caused damages in Koreans. Once the news on the fact of Koreans in Manchuria were every day introduced by newspaper, the Chosun people sympathized with Koreans in Manchurian an led Koreans in Manchuria relief movements all across the country. A Koreans in Manchuria relief movement was useful to attract attention of the Chosun people and concentrate them. Therefore, the nationalist camp actively used Koreans in Manchuria relief movements. Thus, groups of the nationalist camp were concentrated on October 27, 1931 to establish ‘the Council for Disaster of Korean in Manchuria’. After the Manchurian Incident appeared, the Chinese Consulate General and the Japanese Government-General of Korea paid attention to prevention of the recurrence of the overseas Chinese exclusion in July 1931. While the Koreans in Manchuria relief movements were appearing all across the country, the systematic overseas Chinese exclusion by a Chosun nationalist camp was not performed but great and small movements of overseas Chinese exclusion were continuously appeared during a Koreans in Manchuria relief movement. Despite the small-scale overseas Chinese exclusion in some areas, it was not sharply spread due to active responses of the Japanese police. A Koreans in Manchuria relief movement and most of movements of overseas Chinese exclusion were early repressed by quick management of the Chinese Consulate General and active responses of the Japanese police. Menawhile, each social organization in Chosun had a different interest and their own identity was strengthened after taking their course following the Manchurian Incident and therefore ‘the Council for Disaster of Korean in Manchuria’ was not converted to a single representative organization. In addition, Japan did not condone the use of a movement for Koreans in Manchuria for Chosun nationalist movements any more after conclusion of the Manchuria situation after the Manchurian Incident and actively crack down on the establishment of a single representative organization. The overseas Chinese exclusion was caused by the necessity of the Chosun nationalist camp and onlooking Japan. However, Japan pushfully responded this time because anti-Japanese sentiments of China could be worsened to increase the burden if the overseas Chinese exclusion appears in Chosun again after the Manchurian Incident. When there was a dispute about Manchuria between Japan and China, a dispute between Koreans and Chinese was advantageous for Japan. However, after occupying Manchuria, a dispute between Koreans and Chinese was not advantageous any more because it could cause unnecessary friction. The Japanese police early blocked Chosun nationalist movements with a Koreans in Manchuria slogan allowed within the limit not harming the public order of Japan because they thought that an activity space of the Chosun nationalist camp could be extended. In addition, they also actively cracked down on the overseas Chinese exclusion. Due to active respo