高麗의 관료제 관련 법령에서의 唐令의 영향

金皓東(Kim Ho-Dong) 중국고중세사학회 2012 중국고중세사연구 Vol.27 No.-

In the research for Goryeo code among scholars, most of the attention was focused on criminal code and few studies were reported about the ordinance, rule, and form. This paper aimed to establish a foundation for the research to recover Goryeo code which concern about the bureaucratic system and the real operation by Order of Title(官品令), Order of Office(職員令), Order of Election(選擧令), Order of Inauguration(封爵令), Order of Salary(祿令), Order of Task(考課令), Order of Leave(假寧令), Order of Costume(衣服令), and Order of Ceremony(儀制令). Though there was an influence of Tang, Song, and Wuan dynasty code to Goryeo code in sure to operate by modifying them but this paper mainly focused on the possibility of the existence and the classification of items in Goryeo code which might have influenced by Tang dynasty. And this paper gives a meaning for the research on <comparison of administrative principle between Goryeo and Tang·Song in bureaucratic system and the operation> by examining the relationship among construction, item classification of Chinese dynasties and structure of Goryeo code and the change.

pH 적정공정의 적응제어에 관한 연구

김호동(Ho Dong Kim),장홍래(Hong Lae Chang),이재설(Jae Sol Lee),박현수(Hyun Soo Park) 제어로봇시스템학회 1989 제어로봇시스템학회 국내학술대회 논문집 Vol.1 No.10

보일러 터빈 플랜트의 퍼지 논리 제어에 관한 연구

김호동(Ho-Dong Kim),김용호(Yong-Ho Kim),안상철(Sang-Chul Ahn),권욱현(Wook-Hyun Kwon) 제어로봇시스템학회 1991 제어로봇시스템학회 국내학술대회 논문집 Vol.1 No.1

울릉도의 역사로서 ‘우산국’ 재조명

김호동(Kim Ho-dong) 영남대학교 독도연구소 2009 독도연구 Vol.- No.7

신라의 지증왕 13년(512) 때 이사부의 우산국 정벌을 전하는『삼국사기』와 『삼국유사』의 기록은 고대 삼국 성립에서부터 통일신라시대까지 우산국에 관해 언급된 유일한 기록이다. 이 자료를 갖고 흔히들 이사부의 우산국 정벌로 인해 울릉도와 독도는 신라 땅이 되었고, 나아가 한국 땅이 되었다고 한다. 그러나 고려시대의 현종조까지 ‘우산국’ 자료가 나온다. 본 연구는 이에 주목하여 기존 통설을 부정하고, 우산국은 울릉도와 독도를 포함한 환동해 권역의 전략적 요충지에 고대로부터 정착해온 원주민에 의해 건국되고 삼국시대와 고려 현종조에 걸쳐 존재하였던 강력한 해상왕국임을 드러내고자 하였다. 이런 관점에서 바라볼 때 울릉도의 역사는 1883년 개척령에 의해 시작되는 것 이 아니라 한국사의 다른 어떤 지역보다도 강인하고 지속적인 왕조인 우산국이 존재하였고, 우산국이 멸망한 후 고려와 조선시대 울릉도를 찾아 들어간 사람들이 그 전설을 되뇌이며 울릉도를 새로운 삶의 터전으로 가꾸기 위한 노력을 통해 우산국의 영화를 재현하려고 했다고 보아야 한다. 이렇게 볼 때 울릉도는 공도정책에 의해 버려진 섬이 아닌 오랜 역사와 문화를 가진 강인한 정신성과 불굴의 투지와 모험정신으로 뭉친 사람들이 일구어낸 역사가 깃들인 땅으로 되살아날 수 있을 것 이다. 이것이 울릉도가 주체가 되는 우산국의 역사 읽기이다. Usankuk subjugation by the General Yisabu during King Jijeung 13(AD 512) in Silla Dynasty in the record of『Sarnkuk-Saki(三國史記;Three Kingdom History』and 『Samkuk-Usa(三國遺事;Descended History of Three Kingdom』is the only description about Usankuk from the Early Three Kingdom Era to the Unified Silla Dynasty. Many people are easy to recognize the faαthat General Yisabu’s subjugation resulted Ulleungdo and Dokdo became the territory of Silla and now became Korean territory. But, there is record about ‘Usankuk(counσy)’ until Koryo(Korea) Dynasty King Hyeonjong. This research deny the existing theory until and tried to reveal the recognition on Usankuk which include Ulleungdo and Dokdo as a strong marine Kingdom which was established from old age until Three Kingdom Era and Koryo Dynasty King Hyeonjong by the natives of the residents in East Sea Rim area. In this respect, the history of Ulleungdo was not started from 1883 by the Ordinance of Exploration but had existed from old Usan Kingdom in the history of Korea than any other region with strong spirit and persisting kingdom. And 1 emphasize the people of Usankuk remembered the legend of past history and tried to explore their ground unti1 Koryo and Choseon Kingdom to recover their living life after the collapse by the Silla Kingdom. In this point of view, Ulleungdo was not the wasted island by the vacancy policy of Choseon Dynasty but the island of old historical and cultural land by the residents of the islands with strong fighting spirit and adventure to revive their dream. This is another historic meaning on Ulleungdo as subject.

삼국시대 동해안 지역 사원 창전연가설화의 역사적 의미

김호동(Kim Ho-Dong) 영남대학교 민족문화연구소 2004 민족문화논총 Vol.29 No.-

This thesis takes a at the foundation legend of temples in the East Coast areas during the Age of Three Kingdoms for the purpose of high1ighting the fact that re1ígion t∞k the position as a factor for territorγ expansions and control over the public. The summary is as follmngs. Although Buddhism was legalized relatively ear1ier in Koguryo, maintained its control over the public by re1ying on a statuteld armed nùght, compulsion based on the use of force. It goes the same wi Shilla. In spite of itsrly recognition of Buddhism, its expansion to the East Coast taok the form of subjugation based on the use of force and statute‘ However, Shilla began to push ahead with cultural assinùlation policy after having detected a sign of public sentiment tuming against Shilla govemment in a wake of Koguryo s counter-attack against Shìlla s reckless territory exnsion policy. ShiUa founded. nples intensively in areas of traffic and nù1itarγ importartce around the time of unification. The policy was designed to bring ideas and culture together through the spread of the buddhist statute so that the areas worked as part of Shilla ’s genuine tenitories, which led to securing rnaritirne traffic route, and further king over the rnaritime power. The UIfication of the three kingdoms by Shilla and its effective goveming over the local provinces were attributed to the aids of Buddhism. The evidence of the historica1 truth is that the high priests living during the ne around the unification of thr kingdom such as Ja-Jang, E-Sang, Won-Hyo were traced a10ng the East Coast areas down to lJ]-San and up to Kang-Reung

독도영유권 공고화를 위한 조선시대 수토제도의 향후 연구방향 모색

김호동(Kim Ho Dong) 영남대학교 독도연구소 2008 독도연구 Vol.- No.5

시마네현 다케시마문제연구회에서 나온 『다케시마문제에 관한 조사연구 최종보고서』(2007.3)와 일본 외무성의 ｢竹島 다케시마 문제를 이해하기 위한 10가지 포인트｣(2008.3.8) 팸플릿의 경우 독도영유권에 대해 ‘17세기 고유영토설’을 내세우고 있다. 본고는 이에 대한 비판을 제기하기 위해 공도정책이란 용어 대신에 수토정책이란 용어를 사용하자는 주장과 함께 일본의 17세기 고유영토설을 불식하기 위해 향후 수토정책에서 어떤 논리를 보강해야 할 것인가를 살펴보고자 한 것이다. 일본의 17세기 고유영토설을 주장하는 울릉도로 건너갈 때의 정박장이나 어채지로 이용하여 늦어도 17세기 중엽에는 독도의 영유권을 확립했고, 17세기말 울릉도 도항을 금지했지만, 독도 도항은 금지하지 않았다고 한다. 그런 주장이 성립되기 위해서는 한 일양쪽의 자료에서 일본 어부들이 전적으로 독도를 목표로 하여 어로활동을 했다는 자료를 제시하지 않으면 안된다. 독도에서의 어로활동은 울릉도를 근거지로 하여 이루어졌다. 일본 어부들은 ‘독도’만을 대상으로 해서 항해하지 않았다. 안용복 사건이후 울릉도와 독도에 들어온 사람들은 국제법 위반자들이었다. 그들은 1883년 개척령에 의해 일본으로 소개되었다. 임진왜란 이후 1882년 이전까지 조선인들이 울릉도에 들어가 살았고, 그것을 거점으로 하여 독도에까지 어로활동을 하였음을 입증하는 자료를 발굴하여야 한다. 수토정책의 경우 일본으로 하여금 울릉도·독도가 우리 땅임을 인식시키고자 하는 정책을 부각시켜야 하고, 그것을 공도정책이라고 해서는 안된다. 또 수토정책의 대상에는 울릉도 뿐만 아니라 독도도 포함되었음을 드러내주어야만 한다. 지금까지의 자료 가운데 울릉도에서 독도를 보았다는 자료는 제시되고 있지만 독도에 들어가 어로활동을 한 자료, 그리고 수토관이 독도를 심찰한 자료는 아직 발굴하지 못하고 있다. 이에 관한 자료 발굴에 초점을 두어야만 한다. Recently, Japan claims its sovereignty over Dokdo in the 17th century from『the last report for the issue of Takeshim a』by Shimane prefecture s study circle (March, 2007) and Pamphlet ⌜10 issues of Takeshima⌟ by The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (March 8, 2008). To provoke criticism over them, this paper looks through the assertion of using the term of the territorial defense policy instead of evacuation policy of ocean island inhabitants. After reading through the study over the establishment process of the territorial defense polish until now, it also studies what reinforcement is needed on the territorial defense policy in order to wipe out the claim of Japan s territory over Dokdo in the 17th century. In Japan s sovereignty over Dokdo of the 17th century, Japan used Dokdo as a stopover port en route to Ulleungdo and as fishing ground. It thus established its sovereignty over Dokdo by the mid 17th century. At the end of the 17th century Japan prohibited passage of ships to Ulleungdo, but not to Dokdo. To be effected the claim, both Korean and Japanese references should be presented Japanese fishermen engaged in fishing for only Dokdo. Fishing in Dokdo was done from Ulleungdo as a base. The reference of Japan(大谷 家) were registered Takeshima in Utsuryo Island , around Takeshima and so on. By the debate of Ulleungdo , Ulleungdo has been clearly Joseon territory. Japanese fishermen did not sail for only Dokdo. After Ahn, Yong-Bok incident, people to Ulleungdo and Dokdo were the offenders by international law. They are introduced to Japan by settlement policy in 1883. Japan claimed that Japanese fishermen engaged in their monopolistic business enterprise before Ahn, Yong-Bok came to Ulleungdo in 1693. It insisted when many Japanese fishermen engaged in fishing, so Japan has asserted its sovereignty over Dokdo in the 17th century. However, we should find protruded references that Joseon people came to Ulleungdo and engaged in fishing before the 17th century. And, in the territorial defense policy, we should inform the policy that Ulleungdo and Dokdo are Korean territory, and it is not called evacuation policy.

윤용혁 (著) 《 고려대몽항쟁사연구 (高麗對蒙抗爭史硏究)》

김호동 ( Ho Dong Kim ) 일지사 1991 韓國學報 Vol.17 No.4

羅末麗初 變革期의 慶州地域

金皓東(Kim Ho-Dong) 경주사학회 1997 경주사학 Vol.16 No.-

몽골제국과 '大元'

金浩東(Kim Ho-Dong) 역사학회 2006 역사학보 Vol.0 No.192

This article reached the following conclusions. (1) The dynastic name 'Da Yuan' was a Chinese appellation of the Mongolian term Yeke Mongghol Ulus'. It was officially adopted by Qubilai and replaced other Chinese appellations like 'Da Menggu Guo' or 'Da Zaho'. It was only used in the region where Chinese scripts were used such as Korea and Vietnam. Therefore, 'Da Yuan' should not be understood as, or equated with, one of the successor states which we have called Yuan Dynasty', ruling East Asia including China, of the Yeke Mongghol Ulus. (2) However, Chinese literati in the 13th and the 14th centuries who had maintained the historical sense of dynastic continuity regarded 'Da Yuan' as a Chinese dynasty succeeding Han, Tang and Song. Contemporary scholars also accept this viewpoint uncritically, so 'Da Yuan' and Yuan Dynasty' came to be regarded as synonyms. In the meantime, non-Chinese during the time of the Mongol empire did not know 'one' China, but for them there were two different region called 'Catay' and 'Manzi'. (3) The Mongols and the West Asians had another name for the realm of Qa'an, which we have called 'Yuan Dynasty': 'Ulus of Qa'an', This appellation is congruent with other designations such as 'Ulus of Chaghatay', 'Ulus of Jocni', etc. These terminologies show the fact that 'Da Yuan = Yeke Mongghol Ulus' was a conglomeration of multiple uluses. (4) From the top of the conglomeration ruled the Qa'an whose supreme authority was acknowledged by the leaders of other uluses. Only he could employ the terms like 'qa'an' (= great khan) and 'jarligh' (=edict). He also intervened in the succession matters within uluses. This phenomenon is one of the evidences showing the unity of the Mongol empire as a political structure. Under this sense of unity was lying the solidarity among the so-called 'Golden Clan' (Altan Urugh), i e, the descendants of Chinggis Khan, based on their consanguineous tie. This was why Qa'an was called 'aqa' meaning 'elder brother' and 'senior'. He had two faces of 'sovereign' and 'elder brother' of the ruling group. However, as time passed, this sense of unity became slackened and his authority as 'aqa' was also weakened.

몽골제국의 세계정복과 지배

김호동(Kim, Ho-dong) 역사학회 2013 역사학보 Vol.0 No.217

The Mongol conquest and rule of the world is quite an uncommon historical phenomenon, and many scholars have raised questions about how it could happen. This article tries to address to the following two questions: why did the Mongols venture to conquer the world, and how did they manage to rule the ‘world empire’? As for the first question, it is quite clear that Chinggis Khan had no intention, in the initial stage of his campaign, to conquer the world. Since not a few Khitans and Jurchens were already advising him about how to deal with the northern China, it would not be strange even if he was actuall thinking to conquer and rule at least a part of sedentary world. However, the states not only in north China but also in other parts of the world, such as Koryo, Xi Xia, Qara Khitay and Khorezm, fiercely denied to come to terms with this new power. Inevitably the field of war became ever expanded. In other words, for the Mongols the war was in the beginning inevitable but in due course it became the war madated by the eternal heaven, i.e. the conquest to build the world empire. For the second question there is no short of answers either. However, the focus of this paper is on the question how we can detect the peculiarities of the Mongol world empire-ness. We proposed to investigate ‘imperial institutions’ that were put into operation across the entire empire. For example, in the political and military sphere, there were institutions of ordu, keshig, darughachi, ilchi, tamma, jasaq and many others, while in the economic and cultural sphere there were those of qubi, qubchur, ortaq, jamchi, etc. It is impossible to analyze all these institutions, so we have take only one case, the institution of ordu, and made a preliminary analysis.