http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
李淸一 동국지리학회 1985 東國地理 Vol.- No.6
The aim of this study is to clarify the characteristics of handicraft according to cross-sections of time in Korea and analyze why they declined so easily and had little linkage with development of the modern industries. For this purpose, three cross-sections of time are established: the Pre-Korea Dynasty, the Korea dynasty, the Chosun dynasty. the important materials used here are such old documents as Chosum Wangio Sillok(朝鮮王朝實錄), Bibyunsa-Dungrok(備邊司騰錄) and so forth. In the prehistoric age, primitive man provided for himself simple tools for daily living, but he was not a craftsman as specific social standing concerned with handicraft. Since the ancient slavery time, craftsman class was composed of slaves naturalized citizens by war. They ought to supply various items of goods that the aristocratic class demanded. The development of luxurious living and tributary trade to China in the Shila dynasty stimulated the skill and delicacy of handicraft goods. these were produced and supplied by two channel systems: the one was Court, the other Bugok(部曲) which implied a specific village where only a slave group lived. In the Korea dynasty, the organization of handicraft is divided into four categories such as government-controlled handicraft, So(所) handicraft, temple handicraft independent handicraft. Among farmers, the experts in handicraft were seceded from agriculture economy and got into independent professional craftsman class of which the residence was limited to So(所), community of slavery craftsman. In the later days, they came to manage their own workshops and produce special items to sell in the market. The craftsmen of the Korea dynasty were legally registered and their job was transmitted from generation to generation. The central authority, at any time, mobilized them and emploied for more than 300 days in a year to produce the government necessities. This was what was called "government handicraft". On the other hand, Buddhist temple in the Korea Dynasty was managed as feudalistic manor under the patronage of the government and many craftsmen worked at the workshop attached to it. Such a pattern implies "temple handicraft". The characteristics of handicraft during the early part of the Chosun Dynasty were similar to those of the Korea Dynasty, but the pattern of government-controlled handicraft was predominant and more systematized than the others. This was divided into two categories such as the Central(京工匠) in Seoul and the Local(外工匠) which was controlled by local authority. In general, the two phenomena seem to have been most influential to the handicraft location: the one is accessibility to sources of the raw materials and the other to the skill and expert labor. In the later part of the Chosun dynasty, when government-controlled handicraft gradually became bankrupt, private handicraft which emerges in accordance with the general commercial and monetary growth developed under name of Chome(店), so-called private management workshop. Although the first emergence of it was due to the relaxation of feudal system since the middle part of the Chosun dynasty, it seems to have developed so rapidly in the 19th century. In the later part of 19th century, private handicraft was confronted with new features derived from merchant capital and Japanese invaders. The former gradually began to control the handicraft in terms of "putting out system", and the latter imported new modernized European goods and distributed them all over the country in which new capitalism hardly sprouted. This is why Korean handicraft become bankrupt so easily without any linkage with modern manufacturing industries.
이청조 東亞大學校 2000 東亞論叢 Vol.37 No.-
The purpose of the study is to examine the process of lawyers' contingent fee regulation in France in terms of legal history and revision. As well Known, in most contries in Europe, lawyers' contingent fee is prohibited by law Also in France, lawyers' contingent fee has been regulated since the 14th century. In addition, a law prohibiting lawyers' contingent fee was made in 1971. After that, judicial precedents in part accepted lawyers' contingent fee regulation. This pater thus examined the lagislative process and the judicial precedents in the transitional period and discussed the changing process of traditional lawyers' contingent fee regulation in France.