17,18세기 호적대장의 사노비 기재 실태 -경상도 단성현 권대유가 노비를 중심으로-

손병규 ( Son Byeong Gyu ) 한국고문서학회 2004 古文書硏究 Vol.24 No.-

If we consider household slaves from household register, it is not easy to suppose the actual condition of their existence. But We can get near to it by considering the form of registering slaves and its change in household register. For example, we can find that they registered only about 50 percents of their slaves in household register and forms of registering slaves were various. Household slaves were expected to be registered as properties of their owners. Since the 17th century, however, slaves usually made their own houses separated from their owners` houses and were registered in household register in the same way as their owners. Houses of paternal families as economic units were registered in the form of various houses including owner`s house and slave`s house. To conform to forms of consistent with the rule of registering houses and, at the same time, to cope with the change of policy to secure the total number of houses, people adjusted the number of houses with their slaves. How could they adjust the actual social economic units including family and household slaves to registering form of household register? It was related with several problems as follows : national demand represented as population policy, interest between a local government and local residents, a conflict among inside members, and mutual benefits etc. Houses in household register were not only real subjects to taxation but also objects of national redistribution as the final aim of national finance. A local government and local residents estimated their own ability to pay and financial conditions against population policy. Then they tried to meet the total number of houses in accordance with it. A part of slaves were registered as household slaves under their owners or ones separated from their owners. They were represented as regular economic units and played roles in meeting the total number of houses in household register. But it seems that every owner of slaves didn`t have a conciliatory attitude for registering like that. In some cases, houses of slaves were not made separately and a lot of slaves were registered as household slaves under their owners. There always had been efforts both to grasp slaves as their own possessions and to escape from taxation. It was just the same with slaves. Through the late period of the Joseon Dynasty, they were disposed to register houses of slaves, not recording social positions of slaves but reforming their social positions and legislative occupations same as the common people. On the contrary, there went on increasing in the number of slaves, according to the form of registering houses, registered only as properties of their owners. Hence the total number of slaves registered in household register of the mid-19th century increased rather than before. The change of the total number of slaves was basically due to the form of registering according to population policy.

대한제국 호적과 양안의 상호 관련성

김건태 ( Kim Kuentae ) 서울대학교 국사학과 2018 韓國史論 Vol.64 No.-

The household register of Yeongi-gun, Chungcheongnam-do Province, created in 1904, missed many populations like that of the Joseon Dynasty. The land registry of Yeongi-gun created in 1900 reflected the characteristics of the duty policy of the Joseon Dynasty in detail. That land register in the Great Han Empire period had faithfully inherited the tradition could be predicted to some degree by a study of the new household register. It is very unlikely that among the population census and the land survey that were conducted during the same period, only one is traditional and the other is modern. What the people in the Great Han Empire period were thinking of can be guessed through a comparison of the household and land registers of Yeongi-gun. They thought that there was no need to connect the household register with the land register. The connectivity between the household register and the land register was even lower in the Great Han Empire period than in the 1720s. Why did this phenomenon happen? It seems to have been influenced by Neo-Confucianism. Zhu Xi thought that all creatures have their own unique reason. That thought can be considered as emphasizing the uniqueness of all creatures. The Great Han Empire bureaucrats, who were immersed in Neo- Confucianism, may have thought that it was natural not to connect the household register with the land register because both of them had their own unique reason. This does not mean, however, that the two books were not connected because of Neo-Confucianism. That is, the people of the Joseon Dynasty did not think that the household register and the land register should be necessarily connected. In the 1720s, the household register was not completely connected with the land register, either.

17세기 노비호(奴婢戶)의 호적등재 ― 조선왕조 재정의 관점에서

孫炳圭 ( Son Byung-giu ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2020 大東文化硏究 Vol.110 No.-

奴婢가 호를 대표하는 奴婢戶는 17세기 말에서 18세기 초에 걸친 시기의 호적대장에 가장 많이 등재되었다. 본고는 17세기 말에 이르기까지 호적등재 원칙의 관점에서 노비호의 형성과정을 추적하며, 17세기 말에 노비호가 대거 등재되는 이유에 대해서 추론한다. 호를 단위로 하는 ‘稅役’의 부담을 책임지는 자로서, 호의 대표자는 ‘職役’을 가진‘良人’으로 세우는 것이 원칙이다. 17세기 초까지 호적에 사노비들로 구성된 호가 없지 않으나, 모두 ‘노비소유주+노비’의 형태로 등재되었다. 노비소유주가 그 호의 주체임을 분명히 한 것으로 보인다. 그런데 17세기 말의 호적대장에는 호의 대표자로서 사노비가 소유주의 앞에 기재되고 소유주가 기재되지 않는 경우도 있다. 더구나 그러한 호는 전체의 반을 차지할 정도로 많다. 이러한 호의 사노비 소유주는 한 지역의 호적에 자신의 호와 함께 그의 노비들로 구성되는 복수의 호를 등재하고 있다. 17세기 말의 호적장부에는 가능한 한 많은 호구를 파악하고자 하는 정책에 힘입어 등재되는 호구수가 증가하였다. 지역사회에서는 그곳에 할당된 호구의 총수에 준하여호를 단위로 하는 세역 부담이 분배될 필요가 있었다. 이러한 세역 부담을 사회경제적 능력에 따라 균등하게 분배하는 방법과 관련하여, 노비호의 등재에 노비소유주가 깊이 관여한 것으로 추측된다. 1720년경의 토지대장에도 필지마다 토지소유자로서 노비소유주와 노비의 이름이 함께 기재되거나 노비명만이 기재되는 경우가 있다. 이것은 조선왕조 재정의 관점에서 17세기의 노비호 형성과 무관하지 않다. The household registers compiled from the late 17th to early 18th centuries registered a large number of nobi household heads. This study traces the process of composing the household with nobi heads until the late 17th century. Also, this study suggests the reason why the household registers needed to record households of nobi heads. As the person in charge of national taxation and corvée for the household, the household head used to be chosen among free-born in principle, having an occupational record. The households of nobi were registered in the form of 'owner + nobi' in household registers until the early 17th century. This form tells us that the nobi owner was the real head of the household, even it had a nobi head. However, the household registers of the late 17th century used to record the nobi instead of the owner of the nobi, and some households did not report the owner. As a result, we can find not only the household of the owners of nobi but also several households of his nobi in a register. The total number of households and population in the registers in the late 17th century increased due to the financial policy of the government which intended to find more households as possible. The total amount of national taxation and corvée, which was imposed on a county, was allocated to sub-counties by the total number of households. This study supposes that composing and registering households with nobi heads were invented by nobi owners as a means of distributing national taxation in considering the socio-economic capacity of each household in a sub-county. A similar feature was reported from the land register compiled around 1720 which recorded the information of the landowner in the form of 'owner + nobi' or nobi alone to represent the real landowner. From the perspective of national finance, these recording patterns were deeply related to the process and reason for increasing households with nobi heads in the household register in the 17th century.

「신라촌락문서」의 인구통계와 그 작성 시기

박남수(Park, Nam-soo) 신라사학회 2021 新羅史學報 Vol.- No.52

본고에서는 「신라촌락문서」의 원장과 추기의 인구 변동 사항에 주목하여. 공연과 계연, 9등연의 관계 및 동 문서의 작성과정을 살피고자 하였다. 또한 본 문서에 사용된 이두의 사용례를 검토하여 그 작성시기를 분명히 하고자 하였다. 그 결과 공연과 9등연은 정남을 기준으로 한 것이고, 계연수는 등급연으로부터 정남 6명을 기준으로 도출한 계산 값임을 알 수 있었다. 또한 九等烟이 『周禮』에 연원을 두는 한편으로 촌락문서의 운영, 작성 방식은 唐 戶令의 영향을 받은 것이었다. 한편으로 동 문서에 사용된 이두로 미루어 볼 때에, 818년에 동 문서의 원장인 계장을 작성하였음을 확인할 수 있었다. 이를 인구 통계로써 살핀 동 문서의 작성과정과 비교할 때에 그 작성 연차를 확인할 수 있었다. 곧 갑오년(814)에 호등을 산정하였고, 을미년(815)에는 전식년의 호적을 작성하였으며, 정유년(817)에는 원장의 계연과 호등을, 무술년(818)에는 본 문서의 원장인 계장과 호적을, 그리고 기해년(819)에 본 문서의 추기인 계장을 각각 작성하였음을 밝힐 수 있었다. This paper focuses on the changes of demographics recorded in the original document of the Silla Village Register and the supplementary notes. Through the analysis process, I tried to elucidate the relationship among the census household and the proportional census household, and the nine grades of household. I also aimed to understand the documentation process of the register. In addition, the Koreanized Chinese letters used in this document are studied to determine when the register was produced. From the information gathered during the researching process, it is possible to understand that the census household and the nine grades of household were calculated based on the number of able-bodied men while the calculation of the proportional census household was based on 6 able-bodied men. It is known that the system of the nine grades of household was originated from Chou Li. On the other hand, the documentation of Silla Village Register was affected by the regulations of households of the Tang dynasty. Analysis of the forms of Koreanized Chinese letters used in this register confirmed that the original document was written in 818. According to the analysis on the process of documentation of Silla Village Register, which is considered to be a demographic data, the census resister was completed every three years. Therefore, it can be seen that the grade of household was written in 814 and the census register was made in 815. It can also be seen that the proportional census household the and grade of household were recorded in 817, while the proportional census household and the census register were prepared in 818. And finally, it was confirmed that the supplementary notes were made in 819.

광무호적의 호구변동 사례 연구

이유진(Lee, You-Jin) 한국역사민속학회 2016 역사민속학 Vol.0 No.51

본 논문은 광무 3년(1899년)과 광무 4년(1900년)에 편찬된 평안북도 정주군 해산면 호적을 분석한 글이다. 건양 원년(1896) <호구조사규칙>과 <호구조사세칙>이라는 새로운 법령에 의거하여 작성되기 시작한 광무호적은 기존의 호적에 비하여 형식적으로나 내용적으로 많은 차이를 보이고 있었던 것으로 알려져 있다. 즉, 직업, 가족원 구성, 가옥 기재 등이 실제의 사회상을 보여주는 것으로 생각되었던 것이다. 두 해의 자료가 온전한 형태로 연속하여 남아있는 점에 착안하여 해산면 호적의 대략적인 내용을 검토하면서 동시에 광무 3년과 4년, 즉 1년 간 호구의 존속, 탈락, 신입 등의 변동 사항을 중점적으로 분석해 보았다. 그 결과 이상조의 총 인구수는 실제 본문의 총 인구수와 괴리되어 있었고, 호주의 직업을 기록하면서도 여전히 유학 등의 직역을 호주 이름 앞에 병기하고 있었다. 탈락한 호의 수만큼 새로운 호가 유입되어 총 호수와 리별 호수가 해마다 똑같은 숫자로 유지되고 있었다. 특히 1년이라는 짧은 시간적 격차에도 불구하고, 통호수가 광범위하게 변동하였으며 특정 지역(장도리)에서는 연령이 일괄적으로 하향 조정되었던 점도 확인할 수 있었다. 이처럼 해산면의 호구변동을 분석한 결과, 기본적으로 부세수취를 위한 호정운영의 차원에서 광무호적이 작성되었으며, 조선후기 호적대장의 내용과 작성방식과 유사한 면을 상당수 발견할 수 있었다. 호적제도가 변화하였지만, 중앙정부의 영향력이 덜 미치는 외곽 지역에서는 여전히 기존의 호적 작성 방식과 내용을 고수하고 있었던 하나의 사례 분석이 될 수 있을 것이다. This paper examines the fluctuation of households and individuals recorded on Haesan-myeon (海山面) Gwangmu Household Registers (光武戶籍) complied during 1899-1900. Haesan-myeon was an ordinary fishing village on the waterfront and one of the administrative districts of Pyeonganbukdo (平安北道), the province located in the northwest of the Korean Peninsula. Following the Imperial Order No. 61, “the regulations of survey of households” issued in September 1896, Gwangmu household registers were compiled every year from 1896 to 1908. The majority of remaining Gwangmu household registers covers only a year per a location, but the remaining Haesan-myeon Gwangmu household registers cover consecutive two years, 1899-1900, which enables us to analyze the fluctuations of households and individuals recorded. According to the analyses of Haesan-myeon Gwangmu household registers, the total numbers of households in each li(里), a subdivision of myeon, during the two consecutive years were exactly the same even though the two registers reflected the fluctuations such as drop-outs and new entries. The occupational status (職役, jikyeok) of household heads were still recorded as well as the occupation of household head. Among the persisted households during the two years, tong(統) and beon(番) numbers, the specific units of grouping households on the register, changed every year as they did in the former household registers. Even though the format of these new household registers changed substantially comparing to the former ones, the contents of them did not. People who lived in Haesan-myeon, a very marginal place far from the capital of the dynasty, persisted their own way of compiling household registers, because the system of levying and paying taxes did not change much.

18세기 말의 지역별 ‘戶口總數’, 그 통계적 함의

손병규 수선사학회 2011 史林 Vol.0 No.38

The central government of Joseon Dynasty announced household and population statistics by regions in 1789. This document was made at the same time when statistics by regions of various kind of dynasty finances were set. The statistics of the household and population of the state scale grew rapidly in the latter half of the 17th century, when the time of rehabilitation from disasters war against Japan and Qing China. However, these statistics remained unchanged during 18․19th century in spite of time changed. The household statistics of Joseon dynasty was made by just adding up the statistics of the local household register. Because household register would not find out all real inhabitants, it has many omissions and mistakes about the population of registration. The number of the households and the population by regions was fixed in the process of organizing of household, and was simultaneously distributed to an affiliation administration area. The investigation of the household register and the management of statistics by regions were left to the local government, and it was inflected by financial administration. The central government of Joseon Dynasty announced household and population statistics by regions in 1789. This document was made at the same time when statistics by regions of various kind of dynasty finances were set. The statistics of the household and population of the state scale grew rapidly in the latter half of the 17th century, when the time of rehabilitation from disasters war against Japan and Qing China. However, these statistics remained unchanged during 18․19th century in spite of time changed. The household statistics of Joseon dynasty was made by just adding up the statistics of the local household register. Because household register would not find out all real inhabitants, it has many omissions and mistakes about the population of registration. The number of the households and the population by regions was fixed in the process of organizing of household, and was simultaneously distributed to an affiliation administration area. The investigation of the household register and the management of statistics by regions were left to the local government, and it was inflected by financial administration.

대한제국기 호구 변동의 의미-평안북도 정주군 해산면 호적대장과 목장양안 비교 분석-

이유진 ( Lee You-jin ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2019 한국학연구 Vol.0 No.53

본고에서는 대한제국기 호적대장에 드러난 호구 변동의 의미를 고찰하였다. 이를 위하여 광무 3, 4년에 편찬된 평안북도 정주군 해산면 호적대장과 광무 3, 6년에 제작된 해산면 2리 소재 목장양안의 기록을 비교하여 분석하였다. 두 자료는 모두 비슷한 시기 같은 지역에 기반을 가지고 있는 사람들을 등재하고 있기 때문에, 각 자료에 등장하는 사람들을 서로 연결하면 시간 순으로 변화상을 포착할 수 있다. 중앙 정부에서 천명한 호구 조사의 원칙은 개별 세대의 실제 거주 현황을 파악하여 호적에 정확히 반영하는 것이었으나, 자료 분석 결과 실제 호적에 등재된 호는 개별 세대의 거주 상황이나 거주 변동과는 다른 차원에서 파악되었다. 목장양안과의 비교 결과 호적에 여러 개별 세대가 하나로 합쳐져 한 호로 등재되는 경우가 있었다. 또한 호적에서 호가 탈락했는데 도 실제로 그 지역에 계속 살고 있기도 하였고, 어떤 동에 거주하고 있었던 것이 확인되는데 도 호적에서는 다른 동 호적에 기재되기도 하였다. 즉, 호적상 호구 변동이 실제 사람들의 거주와 무관할 수도 있는 가능성을 발견하였다. 이러한 현상은 지방 관청의 행정적 필요를 반영한 결과로 해석할 수 있다. 대한제국기에도 이전 시기의 관행에 따라 중앙정부에서 군현별로 파악된 호총에 근거하여 부세량을 결정하고, 각 군현에서는 이를 호수에 따라 각 행정 단위로 분배하였다. 즉 각 지역에서 개별적으로 부세 행정이 이루어지고 있었기 때문에 각 행정 단위에서는 해당 지역에 거주하는 모든 개별 세대를 호적에 기록하지 않고, 특정한 원칙에 따라 호를 구성하거나 차정했던 것으로 생각된다. 이에 따라 해산면 2리의 경우 다소 복잡한 과정을 거쳐 리는 물론이고 동별로까지 호수를 철저하게 맞추고 있었던 것을 확인할 수 있었다. This paper sheds light on the meaning of fluctuation of households recorded on the household registers complied during the Korean Empire(Gwangmu Empire, 1897~1910). The records of households and people written on the consecutive household registers-compiled in 1899 and 1900-of Haesan-myeon, Jeongju-gun, Pyeonanbukdo Province are analyzed and compared to the records of people written on the two sets of Haesan-myeon state-owned farmland registers, complied in 1899 and 1902. These two kinds of documents produced by local administration sometimes grasped the same people who lived in this area and had duty to pay land tax on account of cultivating the state farmland. The central government of the Korean Empire clarified that every single household and person lived in a specific ‘myeon’, an administrative district, had to be grasped and recorded on the household register of that region. In other words, household registers during this time had to grasp natural households and show the actual residence of people who lived in that administrative district. However, based on this comparative analyses of the records of household registers and state farmland registers, multiple natural households could be recorded as a single household on household registers. And it was possible that people who consecutively lived in the same region could be dropped out of the household registers, or could be recorded on a different region. That is, a household on the household registers during this time was differentiated from a natural household and household registers did not grasp every single natural household and person in the area. On the one hand, there was no borderline of an administrative district, particularly a ‘dong(洞)’, the smallest unit of administration. On the other hand, the contents of household registers could be affected by the intention of a local administration responding the pressure of household taxes levied on a administrative district. Determining the definition of a “household” or setting the total number of households of a region was up to the local administration as occasion demands.

등록가구와 조사가구의 정합성 개선 방법론 연구

전광희(Kwang-Hee Jun) 충남대학교 사회과학연구소 2016 사회과학연구 Vol.27 No.1

This study develops a method for improving coherence in size between registered households and surveyed households. Data are from 2010 census and corresponding administrative sources, linked to reveal the pattern of matching between the two types of households by household size as provided by Statistics Korea for the advance test of 2015 population census. First, we integrate three coherence patterns, say (1) head of a registered household = head of a surveyed household (2) head of a registered household = member of a surveyed household and (3) member of a registered household = head of a surveyed household, to form a single matrix. Second, we calculate the difference between the matrix and its transposed one and the number of registered households which integrate with other ones to form new surveyed ones and the number of registered households to separate into two separate surveyed ones, Finally, we summarize the number of registered households which disappear in household integration and the number of surveyed households which emerge in household separation. The basic procedure is based on the concept of coherence which is less conservative and less rigid and proceeds to reduce to zero the difference between the number of registered households by the size of a surveyed counterpart and the number of surveyed households by the size of a registered counterpart. In this regard, we combine three coherence patterns and perform a matrix calculation described above and focus on the values appearing in purely low triangle cells to make relative surplus or deficit of surveyed households in the final matrix expressed in terms of the difference between the original matrix and its transposed one. In this study, we integrate three size-specific coherence patterns into a single matrix, but the proposed methodology might be applied separately for three separate patterns. Of course, when the methodology is applied separately, the number of registered households for either integration or separation will increase, and the final number of surveyed households to be covered by the registered household database will be somewhat larger than the final number of surveyed households to be covered by the registered database for three combined patterns.

Female Heads of Households Registered in Korea’s Census Registers Between the Seventeenth and Nineteenth Centuries and Their Historical Significance

Kyungran Kim(김경란) 고려대학교 한국사연구소 2018 International Journal of Korean History Vol.23 No.2

일반적으로 한국의 전통시대 여성은 국가의 公的 영역에서 배제된 것으로 이해되고 있다. 그러나 이러한 인식은 선험적인 것이며, 국가의 운영상 여성의 역할이 필요한 부분이 존재하였다. 이에 따라 국가에서는 여성에게 公的인 역할을 부여하고자 하였고, 대표적인 것이 여성이 戶의 대표자인 主戶가 되었다는 사실이다. 주로 “寡婦戶”로 파악되었던 여성주호는 “王政”이라는 이념적 측면에서 국가의 일차적 진휼대상이었다. 따라서 이들에 대한 파악은 民의 최소한의 존립기반을 마련해 주어야 한다는 입장에서 이루어졌다. 하지만 이들은 賦稅 부담을 할 수 없는 虛戶였기 때문에 국가의 재정이 악화될 우려가 있었다. 이 때문에 조선 정부는 여성이 호의 대표자로 서는 것을 어쩔 수 없는 임시적 조치로 설정하고, 그것을 억제하고자 했다. 이와 같이 여성주호는 戶籍上에 임시적이고 제한적 성격을 가지고 있었으나, 한편으로 그것이 현실적으로 가족 가운데 여성이 가지는 지위가 높기 때문이든, 국가의 공적인 부담을 회피하기 위해서든, 국가에 대한 여성의 공적 역할이 증대한 측면을 무시할 수 없다. 이 사실은 억압되어 암흑의 시대를 산다고 여겨지기도 한 전통사회 여성의 사회적, 국가적 위상에 대해 再考해야 함을 의미한다. Generally, women in traditional Korea were thought to have been excluded from the public arena of the state. However, such perception is based on a stereotype that women were confined to the private arena within families. In fact, parts of state administration in Chosŏn Korea required women‟s participation. The state granted women public roles, one of which was allowing them to be heads of households. Female heads of households, who were mostly widow heads of households (kwabuho, 寡婦戶), were primary beneficiaries of the state‟s relief policies under the ideology of virtue-centered royal regime. Therefore the state took a count of these female heads of households in order to provide the basic needs for their livelihood. However, since most of these households were poor and could not pay taxes, their existence threatened the state‟s finances. Because of this, the Chosŏn government only granted temporary householder positions to women and attempted to contain their number. As this study illustrates, female heads of households in census registers were temporary and limited in nature. Women were able to become heads of households because sometimes they occupied higher status in their families or because they tried to avoid the public burden placed on their household. Regardless of the reason, however, it is important to note that women did fulfill important public roles for the state as heads of households. This evidence suggests the need to reexamine the status of women in traditional Korean society, who have been considered to be oppressed and living in the dark ages.

조선 시대 王子와 親盡 後孫의 호적 자료 특징 분석

이건식 한국서지학회 2008 서지학보 Vol.0 No.32

이글은 문헌을 검토하여 定遠君, 陵陽君, 連珠郡夫人의 호적 자료가 20세기 초까지 전하여 왔음을 밝히고 문헌의 설명에 따라 호적 자료의 특징을 기술하였다. 그리고 국내의 자료 所藏處에서 王子와 그 親盡 후손의 호적 자료가 실물로 전하고 있음을 밝혔다. 조선 시대 왕자인 延礽君의 호적 자료 4건, 연령군의 호적 자료 2건, 延齡君 친진 후손의 호적 자료 19건, 麟坪大君의 奉祀 後孫 安興君의 호적 자료 11건, 安興君의 아들 李鎭翼의 호적 자료 11건, 李鎭翼의 제3남 李秉浚의 호구 단자 1건 등을 발굴하여 그 특징을 분석하였다.문헌 검토를 통하여 정원군, 능양군, 연주군부인 등의 호적 자료가 漢城府 호적 대장에서 발견되는 경위를 살필 수 있었다. 이를 통하여 18세기에 한성부의 오래된 호적 대장이 한성부 戶籍庫에 150여년 넘게 일정한 기준으로 뷴류되어 보관되어 왔음을 확인하였다. 그리고 조선 시대 왕자들이 많지 않은 率居 奴婢를 소유하고 있었음을 이해하게 되었다.延齡宮房 家直奴 金錫徵의 准戶口, 仁嬪房 家直奴의 호적 자료를 통하여 18세기 호적 대장 등재의 기준이 ‘血緣’에 있지 않고 ‘家座’에 있었음을 확인하였다. 연령군의 친진 후손의 호적 자료에 수록된 노비의 나이 기재에 부분적으로는 착오가 있음을 밝혔다. 그리고 그 착오는 준호구에서 수정되는 경우도 있지만 수정되지 않는 경우도 있음을 밝혀 준호구 작성의 검증이 매우 엄밀하지는 않음을 밝혔다. 연령군과 그 친진 후손의 호적 자료의 노비질에 기재된 노비의 가계를 분석하여 노비 3대가 등재된 사례 하나, 노비 2대가 등재된 사례 넷, 형제자매가 등재된 사례 둘이 있음을 밝혀 宮房의 솔거 노비 구성이 가지는 특징 일부를 밝혔다.인평대군 봉사후손 안흥군과 그 후손의 호적 자료에 대한 분석을 통해서는 1774년 이후의 호적 자료에서 ‘3員 手決 호구 단자’와 ‘列書式 준호구’의 새로운 양식의 호적 자료가 있음을 밝혔다. 麟坪大君 奉祀 후손 안흥군과 그 후손의 호적 자료의 노비질에는 사망한 노비가 삭제되지 않고 계속 등재되어 있음을 밝혔다.마지막으로 이글에서는 연잉군, 연령군, 안흥군 등 관련 후손의 호적과 국왕의 외손인 金聖廈와 국왕의 사위인 金箕性의 호적 자료를 보조적으로 활용하여 준호구에 기입되는 3員 수결 가운데에 堂上이나 郎廳의 手決은 대리 수결의 가능성도 있음을 언급하였다.조선 시대 王子와 그 親盡 後孫의 호적 자료의 특성을 분석한 이 연구의 결과는 다른 호구 단자와 호구의 특성을 이해하는 데에 많은 도움을 줄 것이다. This study is based on the analysis of the household registers of the Prince Jeongwon(定遠君: 1580~1619), the Prince Neungyang and the Princess Yeonju which was discovered in the early 20th century. And according to research it is discovered that the copy of the household registers of the princes and their descendents far from the line to the throne have been kept through ages; four pieces of materials for the Prince Yeonging(延礽君: 1694~1776), two for Yeongryeong(1699~1719) and nineteen for his descendents who actually practiced the memorial services, eleven copies for the Prince Anheung, the legal descendent for thememorial service of the Prince Inpyeong, another eleven pieces for Yi Jinik, a son of the Prince Anheung, and one piece of material for Yi Pyeongjun, one of the sons of YI Jinik. By the close examination of the documents the writer found that the city hall Hanseongbu(漢城府) during the dynasty have arranged, collected and recorded the household registers over one hundred fifty years in the storage of the household registers. From the analysis of the registers we have new understanding that the princes managed fewer slaves in their house than we expected; and their register was not recorded by the blood relationship but by to which family they were belonged. And some errors in record are found in the preliminary register, which shows that the process of recording of the preliminary register was not made in perfect.The register of the Prince Yeonryeong and his descendents reveals the characteristics of the composure of the slaves living in the house. By some documents after 1774 we can find new format of the household register appeared. And it is new finding that subordinate agents of the ministers confirmed the preliminary registers, which could help to understand other documents of the household registers during Joseon better.