GHQ 점령기 일본의 재일조선인 정책

박창건(Chang-Gun PARK) 한국정치외교사학회 2018 한국정치외교사논총 Vol.39 No.2

본 연구는 GHQ 점령기 일본이 어떠한 형태의 재일조선인 정책을 시행했는지를 조명하는 것이다. 이는 재일조선인 문제를 ‘특수한 외국인’ 신분으로 규정한 GHQ의 재일외국인 정책에서 기인된 ‘의도적 방치’라고 하는 입장과 맥락을 같이했다. 여기에서 ‘의도적 방치’는 당시 일본 의 재일조선인 정책에 대한 전체상을 설명하는 개념적 도구로써 GHQ에게 절대적 존재였던 미국정부의 전후처리 정책이 어디에 방점을 두고 진행되었는지를 실증적으로 재조명하는 지표이다. 이를 통해 본 연구는 재일조선인 문제가 한일, 한미, 미일 즉 한미일 3자 간의 역학관 계에서 표출된 GHQ 점령기 일본의 전후처리 정책을 돌아볼 수 있는 중요한 재료로 판단된다. 무엇보다도 국무부·육군·해군 3성 조정위 원회(SWNCC)에 의한 정책결정 과정에서 난민정책의 전반을 설계한 GHQ의 민정가이드 재일외국인 정책은 일본이 자의적 이중 잣대로 재 일조선인 정책을 수립하는 기반을 제공했다. 그 결과 일본은 재일조선 인을 ‘특수한 외국인’이라는 항목으로 기술하고 일반적 연합국민을 제외한 모든 외국인으로 분류했다. 하지만 당시 일본정부가 자국민의 보호를 우선시하였기 때문에 많은 재일조선인을 형식적으로 ‘특수한 외국인’ 신분으로 다루었지만 실질적으로 ‘무국적’으로 취급했다. 이처럼 재일조선인의 문제는 ‘재일난민’의 범위를 뛰어 넘어, ‘재일성’ 형성의 중대한 영향, GHQ 점령기 동북아 지역의 구조적 역학관계에서 파생된 냉전의 기원과도 맥락을 같이하고 있다. The purpose of this study is to examine how Japan has implemented the policy of the Koreans in Japan during the GHQ occupation. This was in line with the position of ‘intentional neglect’ caused by GHQ’s foreigners policy on the Koreans in Japan as defined a ‘special foreigner’ status. In this context, ‘intentional neglect’ is a conceptual tool that explains the overall image on Japan’s policy towards the Koreans in Japan at that time. Indeed, it was an indicator for re-examining empirically where the US government’s postwar policy, which was absolute to GHQ, should be focused on. Through this study, the problem of the Koreans in Japan is considered to be an important material to look at the postwar policy of Japan in the GHQ occupation revealed in the dynamic relationship of Korea-Japan, US-Korea, US-Japan. Above all, GHQ s Civil Affairs Guide (CAG) which was an designing the overall refugee policy in the decision-making process by the State Department, the Army and the Navy Three-Party Coordination Committee (SWNCC) provided the foundation establishing the policy of the Koreans in Japan as an arbitrary double standard. As a result, Japan described the Koreans in Japan as ‘special foreigners’ and classified them as all foreigners except the general union citizens. However, Japan treated the Koreans in Japan as ‘special foreigners’ formally and as ‘stateless’ realistically because the Japanese government prioritized the protection of its citizens at that time. Thus, the problem of Koreans in Japan was in line with the origin of the Cold War which was derived from the structural dynamics of the GHQ occupation in Northeast Asia.

해방직후 재일조선인에 대한 일본의 치안정책

이승희 동국대학교 일본학연구소 2018 일본학 Vol.46 No.-

The purpose of this study is to reaffirm the characteristics in the public peace policy of GHQ/SCAP and Japanese government by summarizing the flow of the public peace policies for both parties during the period starting from the defeat of Japan in August 1945 to the time of entering into the Treaty of Peace with Japan in August 1952. Even prior to establish GHQ/SCAP, the US government has the adverse perception that the presence of KoreanJapanese would be a burden on finance and economy of the postWar Japan and it would be interfering with the public peace. As a result of GHQ/SCAP taking on the occupational policies only for its convenience without due consideration on historic background or cultural rights formed on KoreanJapanese, their return was ended without significant outcome. GHQ/SCAP had no interests in livelihood and treatment of those liberated peoples remained in Japan. Those KoreanJapanese were forced to go into the black market to sustain their livelihood and they had to organize ethnic organization to take on actions in group in order to improve their social positions. In the process, they were encountered with the Japanese police that wanted to suppress them. Watching this development, GHQ/SCAP perceived KoreanJapanese as the disorderly existences as well as the roadblock of the occupational policies, and began to process KoreanJapanese in the point of view of public peace issues. GHQ/SCAP's policy on KoreanJapanese shifted toward anticommunism policy around August 1948. Consequently, the GS of GHQ/SCAP instructed the Japanese government to dissolve KJF and the anticommunist policies of GHQ/SCAP were strengthened together with the deepening of the cold war between the east and west. The policies GHQ/SCAP on KoreanJapanese showed the shifting tendency for each period, but the Japanese government considered that its greatest threat for maintaining the public peace would be the KoreanJapanese in its undertaking of the public peace policies. After its defeat in August 1945, the Japan's policeoriented public peace organizations intended to maintain its control with the Special Higher Police of the wartime as it considered the KoreanJapanese as ‘Japanese’, not as the ‘liberated peoples’ as much as possible. In particular, around 1946, with the background of enhancement of labor movement and popular movement in Japan, the Japanese government gained the support of G2 of GHQ/SCAP that placed the priority in securing the public peace rather than the democracy for Japanese police in a way of promoting the maintenance of the public peace police and strengthening of functions. Through the continuous request, the Japanese government was approved by GHQ/SCAP for its judicial police authority and criminal trial right on the KoreanJapanese in February 1946. The Japanese government consistently held those KoreanJapanese as the main culprit for deteriorating security after the War and turned it as the cause to strengthen the police authority. With the Korean War broke out in June 1950, the old KoreanJapanese Federation deployed active antiAmerican struggle by undertaking the underground activities along with the Japan's Communist Party, and GHQ/SCAP and the Japanese government considered the KoreanJapanese as the subjects of the ‘anticommunist public peace issues’ now. 본 연구의 목적은 해방직후 1945년 8월 일본의 패전부터 1952년 8월 대일강화조약 체결까지의 시기를 대상으로 재일조선인에 대한 GHQ/SCAP과 일본정부의 치안정책에 나타나는 흐름을 정리함으로써 양자의 치안정책이 갖는 특징을 재확인하는 것이다. GHQ/SCAP의 설치 이전부터 미국정부 내에서는 이미 재일조선인의 존재가 전후 일본의 재정과 경제에 부담이 되며 치안에 저해가 될 것이라는 부정적인 인식이 존재하고 있었다. GHQ/SCAP 역시 재일조선인이 형성된 역사적 배경이나 민족적 권리에 대한 충분한 고려 없이 점령정책의 편의상 일방적으로 귀환을 추진한 결과, 귀환은 불철저하게 끝났다. GHQ/SCAP은 일본 잔류자의 ‘해방민족’으로서의 생계유지와 처우에 대해서는 무관심했다. 재일조선인은 스스로 생계를 유지하기 위해 암시장에 나갈 수밖에 없었고, 처우를 개선하기 위해 민족단체를 결성하여 조직적으로 운동을 펼쳐나갈 수밖에 없었다. 그 과정에서 이를 단속하려고 하는 일본의 경찰과 충돌이 벌어지게 되었다. 이를 본 GHQ/SCAP은 본격적으로 재일조선인을 무질서한 존재, 점령정책의 방해자로 인식하고, 재일조선인을 치안문제의 시점에서 처리하기 시작했다. GHQ/SCAP의 재일조선인 정책은 1948년 8월을 기점으로 반공정책 중심으로 변화해나간다. 동서 냉전의 심화와 함께 GHQ/SCAP의 반공정책도 강화되어 나갔다. 재일조선인에 대한 GHQ/SCAP의 정책이 시기별로 변화하는 양상을 보였지만, 일본정부는 치안유지에 가장 커다란 위협과 과제는 재일조선인이라고 일관되게 인식하고 치안정책을 추진해 나갔다. 1945년 8월 패전 이후에도 경찰을 중심으로 하는 일본의 치안기구는 재일조선인에 대해 가능한 한 ‘해방민족’이 아닌 ‘일본인’으로 간주하며 전시의 특고를 계승한 통제를 유지하려고 했다. 특히 1946년경부터 일본 내 노동운동과 대중운동의 고양을 배경으로 일본정부는 일본경찰의 민주화보다 치안확보를 우선시하는 GHQ/SCAP 참모제2부의 지지를 얻어 공안경찰의 정비와 기능 강화를 추진할 수 있게 되었다. 일본정부는 계속된 요구를 통해 1946년 2월에는 재일조선인에 대한 사법경찰권과 형사재판권을 GHQ/SCAP로부터 용인 받았다. 일본정부는 전후 치안악화의 책임을 일관되게 재일조선인에게 돌리며 경찰력 강화의 명분으로 삼았다. 1950년 6월 한국전쟁이 발발하자 구 조련 측은 일본공산당과 함께 지하활동에 들어가 활발한 반미 투쟁을 전개하였고, GHQ/SCAP 및 일본정부는 재일조선인을 이전보다 더 ‘반공치안문제’의 대상으로 바라보게 되었다.

占領期の對日武道政策 : チャソバラ禁止と剣道への対応を巡って

谷川建可 한중인문학회 2006 한중인문학연구 Vol.18 No.-

연합국군최고사령관 총사령부(GHQ)는 점령하 일본에서 국가신도와 연결시켜 전시기 일본인의 정신구조에 나쁜 영향을 주었다는 이유로 무도 중에서도 검도를 엄하게 규제했다고 하여 검도계에서는 일반적으로 미점령기를 "검도가 탄압받은 겨울시기"로 받아들여지고 있다. 1950년에 부활이 허가된 궁도나 유도에 비하여 검도만 공식적으로는 점령 종결후의 1953년4월까지 해금이 되지 않았고 1952년4월에 사실상 부활했을 때에도 "죽도 경기"라는 귀에 설은 단어로 바꿔 사용 하게 했다. 하지만 실제로 1945년11월에 나온 "검도금지" 하달은 검도전체에 대한 금지조치가 아니라 "학교검도"만을 금지했다. 그것을 역으로 말하면 실제 개인이 자주적으로 검도연습을 하는 것 자체는 금하지 않은 이유는 검을 가진 주인공이 등장하는 것만으로 무조건 문제시하여 영화에서 "찬바라(칼싸움) 금지"라는 상황과는 차원이 전혀 다르다. 개인이 자주적으로 검도의 연습을 하는 것이란 구체적으로는 "道場劍道"와 "警察劍道"이고 이러한 것에 대해서는 상관없다고 GHQ는 공식적으로 표명하고 있다. 또한, 검도를 국가주의적 정신교육과 연결된 조직으로 간주하고 있던 大日本武德會가 자주해산을 선언하긴 했지만 GHQ에 의한 강제해산 명령을 내린 사실도 꼭 검도(무도)에 대한 엄한 탄압이었다고 말할 수 없다. 명령에 의한 해산과 자주적 해산과의 결정적 차이는 재산몰수의 유무라는 부분이 아니라 조직의 중심 입장에 있던 자에 대하여 공직추방조치를 취할 수 있는가 아닌가라는 점일 것이다. 그런 의미에서 오히려 검도나 그 외의 무도를 주입시켜왔던 국가주의적인 프레임을 GHQ가 제거해 주었다고 하는 플러스 평가까지 할 수 있을 것이다. 프랑케문고가 소장하고 있는 점령기 경찰관계 잡지에는 경찰관에 의한 유도 · 검도대회의 기사가 빈출하고 있다. 그러한 자료를 통해 지역에 따라 온도차를 느끼면서도 전체적으로는 1949년 가을경까지는 "警察劍道" "道場劍道"와 함께 국가주의적 정신교육에서 탈피하여 서양의 펜싱과 같이 새로운 스포츠로 다시 태어날 것을 강조하면서 검도나 유도가 일본 각지에서 행하여지고 있었던 것을 알 수 있다. 전국 각 지역(都道府縣) 경찰에서 유도 · 검도대회에 자주 GHQ관계자가 내빈으로 초청되어 실제로 GHQ스텝이 검도나 유도를 배우기 시작한 사람도 적지 않았다. 물론 지방군정부에 따라서는 GHQ의 의향과는 관계없이 일반인의 검도구의 소각을 명하거나 소유자를 처벌하거나 하는 혼란도 있었지만 그것이 GHQ에 의한 검도에 대한 조직적인 탄압이었다고 해석하는 것은 잘못이다. 그 후 1949년11월에 "警察劍道"훈련중지 통달이 발하였다고 하는 자료가 있지만 그것이 사실이라면 어떠한 경위로 행해졌는지는 금후의 조사로 명백히 하고자 한다. During the occupation of Japan by allied forces, it has been said that the General Headquarters/Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers(GHQ/SCAP) severely restricted the practice of budo(martial arts), and kendo in particular, as being linked to nationalistic Shintoism and as having badly influenced the minds of the Japanese during the war. Thus in the world of kendo, this particular period during the occupation is generally referred to as the bleakest age in kendo, when kendo was persecuted. It is true that compared to kyudo(Japanese archery) and judo, which were officially reinstated by 1950, only kendo did not see its ban officially lifted until April of 1953. Even after April 1952, when kendo had been resurrected for all practical purposes, it was still referred to by the unfamiliar term, shinai kyogi(bamboo sword fencing). However, the original ban on kendo proclaimed in November 1945 was actually an exclusive ban on school-kendo and not a blanket ban on all manner of kendo practice. In other words, the act per se of an individual practicing kendo on one's own was not prohibited. In this sense, the situation with kendo differed greatly from the ban on chanbara(swordplay) in films, which caused movie characters to be unconditionally frowned upon for simply wielding a sword. When an individual practices kendo of his own accord, he specifically practices dojo kendo or keisatsu (police) kendo. In actuality, the GHQ/SCAP had officially sanctioned the practice of these two types of Kendo. In spite of the fact that GHQ/SCAP issued mandatory dissolution order to the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai(Greater Japan Martial Virtue Society), once considered an organization promoting kendo in connection with prewar nationalistic moral education, even after it had declared it would voluntarily dissolve itself, there is no evidence to suggest that GHQ/SCAP had done so out of a sense of severe persecution. The decisive difference between mandatory and voluntary dissolution lies not in the confiscation of property, but whether the authorities could enforce measures to expel the leading figures of the organization from public office. In this sense, the actions of the GHQ/SCAP can be assessed in a positive light, since it was they who had freed kendo and the other budo(martial arts) from the restricting framework of nationalism. In police related publications from the occupation era, as preserved in the Prange Collection, we find many articles on kendo and judo competitions among police officers. Despite slight differences in regional attitudes, the articles generally emphasize that by the fall of 1949, kendo and judo, together with keisatsu-kendo and dojo-kendo by then freed from the strictures of nationalistic moral education, had been given new life as sports, not unlike fencing in the West, and we learn that they were being practiced everywhere in Japan. In fact, in many kendo and judo competitions held nationwide by prefectural police, GHQ/SCAP officials were often invited as guests and a number of GHQ/SCAP workers actually began to practice kendo and judo. Granted, there were a number of disturbing incidents where local government forces, ignoring the wishes of the GHQ/SCAP, went ahead and incinerated the kendo equipment owned by the general public and punished their owners. However, it would be a misunderstanding to interpret these acts as a systemic persecution of kendo on the part of the GHQ/SCAP. Some historical materials point to a November 1949 ban on the practice of keisatsu kendo, but whether such a ban was actually issued or the circumstances leading to such a ban are yet to be researched.

GHQ 일본 점령하 야스쿠니신사의 변화

김현아(Hyun-Ah Kim) 일본사학회 2024 일본역사연구 Vol.63 No.-

이 논문에서는 GHQ 일본점령 시기에 야스쿠니신사에서 ‘위령’ 중심의 평화주의가 지향(志向)되었다는 점에 주목하고 평화적 ‘위령’과 관련하여 어떠한 제사가 거행되었는지를 살펴보고자 하였다. GHQ는 일본점령 직후 신도지령과 종교법인령을 개정 공포하였다. 이로써 야스쿠니신사는 국가적 지원이 중단되고 일개 종교법인이 된 이상 자구책을 마련하는 것이 요구되었다. 야스쿠니신사는 군국주의 신사라는 이미지에서 탈피해 평화적 ‘위령’을 내세우게 되었다. 그 이유는 GHQ 점령정책 아래 야스쿠니신사의 경제적 입장을 고려하면 유족이나 일반 민중을 숭경자로 삼기 위해서는 보편타당한 평화주의 신사로 바꿀 필요가 있었기 때문이다. 평화적 ‘위령’의 제사에는 전시기에 ‘집단성’이 강조되었던 제신의 제사를 야스쿠니신사에서 유족이 전사자 개인의 이름으로 신청하면 거행할 수 있는 에이타이카구라사이 제도를 들 수 있다. 또한 조상숭배 ‘위령’의 성격을 지니는 미타마마쓰리 외에 다양한 마쓰리가 처음으로 거행되었다. 야스쿠니신사가 대중 지향적이고 평화적 ‘위령’를 추구한 것은 GHQ에 의해 강요되어 출발한 것이라 볼 수 있다. 그렇지만 GHQ 점령하 야스쿠니신사에서 새롭게 거행된 다양한 마쓰리는 야스쿠니신사의 변화라는 측면에서 볼 때 일련의 노력으로 평가할 수 있다. This study aims to examine rituals performed in relation to peaceful commemoration, with a focus on Yasukuni Shrine’s pursuit of pacifism centered on the appeasement of the spirits during the occupation by the General Headquarters (GHQ). The GHQ issued the Shinto Directive and the Religious Corporations Ordinance immediately after the occupation of Japan. This meant Yasukuni Shrine was no longer supported by the state and was reduced to a mere religious corporation, necessitating self-reliant measures. Departing from its militaristic image, Yasukuni Shrine chose to advocate for peaceful commemoration. Considering its economic position under GHQ’s occupation policy, the shrine needed to transform itself into a universally acceptable pacifist shrine in order to attract bereaved families and the general public as worshippers. The peaceful memorial rituals include the Eitai Kagura Festival, which allowed bereaved families to apply to conduct an individualized memorial ritual for fallen soldiers at Yasukuni Shrine, departing from the collective nature of previous deity-centric ceremonies during wartime. In addition, various other festive occasions (“matsuri”) were held for the first time, including the Mitama Matsuri, which is an ancestor worship memorial festival. Yasukuni Shrine’s pursuit of a public-oriented and peaceful approach to commemoration was essentially initiated as a result of pressure or coercion from the GHQ. However, the various new rituals (“matsuri”) initiated at the shrine during the GHQ’s occupation can be seen as part of its efforts to transform itself.

戰後 東北亞 國際關係와 在日韓人

金太基(Kim, Tae-Ki) 한일민족문제학회 2008 한일민족문제연구 Vol.15 No.-

この論文は解放以後から阪神教育闘争が起きるまでの在日韓人の民族教育に対するGHQの政策について実証的に考察したものである。GHQの民間情報教育局は基本的に民族教育に対し否定的な立場を持っていた。解放された民族としての在日韓人の権利は考慮しないで、｢少数民族｣に対する民族教育は日本社会の混乱を惹起させるということであった。一方、在日韓人の法的地位と関連して、マッカーサー将軍の政治顧問であり、外交局長だったアチソン局長は1945年12月の時点では ｢政治的な理由｣を取り上げ、在日韓人を連合国民として見做すべきべきであると国務省に提案した。在日韓人を連合国民として取り扱えば、日本国内の秩序が不安定になるかも知れないが、韓半島における米国の信頼を高めるのに、それが有利だと判断したのである。だが、アチソンは1946年5月になれば、在日韓人を日本国民として見做すべきであるとして、従来の立場を変えたのである。解放された朝鮮との関係よりは日本国内の秩序維持を優先することになったのである。このようなDS局長の提案に対してGHQも米国務省も同意した。韓米関係より日米関係が重視されたのである。国人登録令では｢外国人｣として取り扱いながらも、朝鮮人学校と児童を日本の教育基本法と学校教育法の枠に強制的に入れようとした。当然ながら、これに在日韓人は激しく抵抗した。在日韓人の抵抗が激しく、日本の地方行政当局は在日韓人を日本の教育法に服従させることができなかった。ついに、1948年にGHQが関与して、文部省は1·24通牒を発した。それでも朝連を中心とした朝鮮人学校関係者は徹底的に抵抗した。南朝鮮での5·10総選挙が近づき、焦りを見せ始めた占領軍は朝鮮人学校と共産主義者が結びついていて、朝鮮人学校で共産主義教育が行われていると問題にし始めた。そして、ついに阪神教育事件が発生すると、その責任を全部共産主義者の仕業であると公言した。解放された民族の純粋な教育闘争が｢権力｣によって、歪曲され始めたのである。 This paper examined the GHQ’s policy on the national education of Korean Japanese from 1945 to Hanshin Education Struggle 1948. The Civil Information and Education Section of GHQ basically had a negative attitude toward the national education of Koreans. They thought that that kind of education might disturb the Japanese society without considering their national right of the Korean minority. George Atcheson, D. MacArthur’s political advisor and the chief of the diplomatic section, suggested that the Korean Japanese should be regarded as the United Nations national. If the idea had been adopted, it could have lead the unstability of domestic order in Japan but could certainly have worked in strengthening the American position in Korea. However, by May 1946, Atcheson changed his own opinion and said that the Korean Japanese should be considered as retaining their Japanese nationality. He thought that it was more important to maintain domestic order in Japan than to construct desirable relations with the liberated Korea. GHQ and the State Department agreed to the idea, emphasizing the US-Japan relationship. In 1947, GHQ began to carry out the policy that forcibly put the Korean Japanese into the frame of the Japanese education legislations, which, in turn, faced Koreans intense resistance. As the municipal authorities could not crack down all their struggles, Japan’s Education Ministry, assisted by the GHQ, gave an ultimatum of January 24, 1948. Howeber, Korean Japanese continued to fight against the GHQ policy. In response, the occupation forces questioned that there were communists, who taught the communist ideology in the Korean schools. As the Hanshin Education Struggle broke out, the GHQ blamed only on communists, without taking any responsibility themselves. The Korean Japanese, as a liberated nation, struggled to establish their national education on their own but their efforts were distorted by GHQ.

점령기 GHQ에 의한 지역공동체 인식과 재편 - 조나이카이(町内会)를 중심으로 -

김혜숙 한양대학교(ERICA캠퍼스) 일본학국제비교연구소 2022 비교일본학 Vol.56 No.-

This research was conducted to shed light on why GHQ used Chōnai-kai (neighborhood associations) once again as a mobilization instrument for governance during the occupation, given their essential position as the lowest administrative body under the total mobilization system throughout the wartime period. In addition, this article examines which aspects of Chōnai-kai were abolished and which were maintained. To achieve this objective, the perspective of Chōnai-kai by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) at the end of the war and GHQ during the occupation period was investigated. Due to the emergence of reverse course, the resurgence of bureaucratic forces as a support foundation for this policy was also investigated. Additionally, the rearrangement of the old Chōnai-kai into the new Chōnai-kai in the local community was investigated. As a result of the analysis, the empowerment of Chōnai-kai in local politics was identified as a reform priority as part of the democratization measures. However, GHQ utilized and maintained Chōnai-kai's community maintenance function. In the end, Chōnai-kai was the lowest administrative body, and its identity and function remained the same from wartime to the occupation period, with only the Japanese government being replaced by the GHQ. The occupation period coincides with the transition from Empire to Post-Empire. In the end, Chōnai-kai was resurrected as a new Chōnai-kai in the midway zone between power and life, and it continues to exist up to the present day. 본고의 연구목적은 전시기 총동원체제하에서 행정의 말단기구 역할을 했던 조나이카이(근린조직)가 점령기 GHQ에 의해 또 다시 통치를 위한 동원장치로 일상생활에 이용된 배경을 밝히는 것이다. 또한 조나이카이의 어떠한 점은 단절되었고 어떠한 점은 연속되고 있는지를 살펴보고자 했다. 이를 위해 전쟁 말기 참모본부전략국(OSS)과 점령기 GHQ의 조나이카이에 대한 인식을 살펴보았다. 또한 역코스를 배경으로 이 정책의 지지기반으로서 관료 세력의 복귀와 구・조나이카이에서 신・조나이카이로의 재편과정을 살펴보았다. 분석결과 조나이카이가 지방정치에서 세력화하는 것은 민주화 조치의 하나로 개혁의 대상으로 삼았다. 그러나 GHQ는 조나이카이의 공동체 유지기능을 이용하고 존속시켰다. 결국 조나이카이는 통치의 말단기구로서 전시기에서 점령기로 이어지고 있고, 이를 이용하는 권력측이 일본정부에서 GHQ로 바뀌었을 뿐이다. 점령기는 제국에서 포스트제국으로 나아가는 시점이라고 할 수 있다. 결국 조나이카이는 권력과 생활의 중간지대에서 신・조나이카이로 거듭나고 있고 현재도 이어지고 있다.

占領期の?日武道政策一一チャンバラ禁止と?道への??を巡って : Dealing with the Prohibitions on Chanbara (Swordplay) and Kendo

谷川建司 韓中人文學會 2006 국제학술대회 Vol.16 No.-

連合?軍最高司令官?司令部 (GHQ)は占領下日本で?家神道と結びつき?時期の日本人の精神構造に?しき影響を?えたものとしての武道を、中でも?道を?しく規制したと言われており、?道界では一般に占領期を“?道が??された冬の時代"と捉えている。確かに、1950年に復活が許可された弓道?柔道と比べ、?道のみ公式には占領終結後の1953年4月まで禁止が解かれず、1952年4月に事?上復活した際も “しない競技"という耳慣れない言葉に置き換えられていた。だが、?は 1945年 11月に出された “?道禁止" 通達は?道全?に?する禁止措置ではなく “?校?道"のみ禁止だった。逆に言えば?は個人が自主的に?道の練習をすること自?は禁止されておらず、その点は、刀を持った主人公が登場するだけで無?件に問題視された映? における “チャンパラ禁止" の?況とは全く異なる。個人が自主的に?道の練習をすることとは、具?的には “道場?道" と “警察?道" である。これらについてはお構いなし、とGHQは公的に表明していた。 また、?道を?家主義的精神?育と結びつけた組織と見なされていた大日本武??が自主解散を宣言したもののGHQにより?制解散命令を出された事?も、必ずしも?道 (武道) に?する?しい??だったとは言えない。命令による解散と自主的解散との決定的違いは財産の??の有無という部分ではなく、むしろ組織の中心的立場にいた者に?して公職追放措置を講ずることが出?るか否かという点だったはず。その意味では、むしろ?道やその他の武道を押し?めていた?家主義的なフレ?ムをGHQが取り?ってくれたとプラス評?すらし得る。 プランゲ文庫所?の占領期の警察?係?誌には警察官による柔?道大?の記事が頻出する。それらにより、地域によって?度差を持ちつつも、全?としては1949年秋頃までは“警察?道"、“道場?道"ともに、?家主義的精神?育から?皮し、西洋のフェンシングのように新たなスポ?ツとして牛まれ?わったことを?制しつつ、?道や柔道が日本各地で行われていたことがわかる。全?各都道府?警での柔?道大?にはしばしばGHQ?係者が?賓として拙かれ、?際にGHQスタップで?道や柔道を習い始める者も少なくなかった。むちろん、地方軍政府によってはGHQの意向とはお構いなしに一般人の?道具の?却を命じたり、所有者を?罰したりといった混?もあったようだが、それがGHQによる?道に?する組織的な??であったと解?することは誤りである。その後1949年日月に“警察?道"訓練中止通達が?せられたとしている資料もあるが、それが事?なのか、そうだとすればどのような?緯でなされたのかは、今後の調査で明らかにしたい。 During the occupation of Japan by allied forces, it has been said that the General Headquarters/Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers(GHQ/SCAP)severely restricted the practice of budo (martial arts), and kendo in particular, as being linked to nationalistic Shintoism and as having badly influenced the minds of the Japanese during the war. Thus in the world of kendo, this particular period during the occupation is generally referred to as the bleakest age in kendo, when kendo was persecuted. It is true that compared to kyudo (Japanese archery) and judo, which were officially reinstated by 1950, only kendo did not see its ban officially lifted until April of 1953. Even after April 1952, when kendo had been resurrected for all practical purposes, it was still referred to by the unfamiliar term, shinai kyogi (bamboo sword fencing). However, the original ban on kendo proclaimed in November 1945 was actually an exclusive ban on school-kendo and not a blanket ban on all manner of kendo practice. In other words, the act per se of an individual practicing kendo on one's own was not prohibited. In this sense, the situation with kendo differed greatly from the ban on chanbara (swordplay) in films, which caused movie characters to be unconditionally frowned upon for simply wielding a sword. When an individual practices kendo of his own accord, he specifically practices dojo-kendo or keisatsu (police)-kendo. In actuality, the GHQ/SCAP had officially sanctioned the practice of these two types of Kendo. In spite of the fact that GHQ/SCAP issued mandatory dissolution order to the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai (Greater Japan Martial Virtue Society), once considered an organization promoting kendo in connection with prewar nationalistic moral education, even after it had declared it would voluntarily dissolve itself, there is no evidence to suggest that GHQ/SCAP had done so out of a sense of severe persecution. The decisive difference between mandatory and voluntary dissolution lies not in the confiscation of property, but whether the authorities could enforce measures to expel the leading figures of the organization from public office. In this sense, the actions of the GHQ/SCAP can be assessed in a positive light, sice it was they who had freed kendo and the other budo (martial arts) from the restricting framework of nationalism. In police-related publications from the occupation era, as preserved in the Prange Collection, we find many articles on kendo and judo competitions among police officers. Despite slight differences in regional attitudes, the articles generally emphasize that by the fall of 1949, kendo and judo, together with keisatsu-kendo and dojo-kendo, by then freed from the strictures of nationalistic moral education, had been given new life as sports, not unlike fencing in the West, and we learn that they were being practiced everywhere in Japan. In fact, in many kendo and judo competitions held nationwide by prefectural police, GHQ/SCAP officials were often invited as guests and a number of GHQ/SCAP workers actually began to practice kendo and judo. Granted, there were a number of disturbing incidents where local government forces, ignoring the wishes of the GHQ/SCAP, went ahead and incinerated the kendo equipment owned by the general public and punished their owners. However, it would be a equipment owned by the general public and punished their owners. However, it would be a misunderstanding to interpret these acts as a systemic persecution of kendo on the part of the GHQ/SCAP. Some historical materials point to a November 1949 ban on the practice of keisatsu-kendo, but whether such a ban was actually issued or the circumstances leading to such a ban are yet to be researched.

제국의 식민지·점령지 지배와 ‘전후보상’ 기록의 재인식조선의 식민지지배·보상처리 결재구조와 원본출처를 중심으로

김경남 한국기록학회 2014 기록학연구 Vol.0 No.39

This article aims to inquire into the decision making system and the sources of the original documents made by means of it in Imperial Japan, the colonial Chosun, GHQ, and the occupied Japan in terms of the post-war treatments of compensation on the Japanese colonial rules. It deals with them from 1910 to 1952 in the perspective of history and archivistics. This article attempts to establish the foundation on which the perception of the documents made in the Imperial Japan, its colony, and the occupied territory would be widened by placing the colonial rules and the compensation on them into a continuous line. The records of Japan’s forced occupation of Korea during 1910-1945, and the original records documenting the decision making process of post-war compensation under GHQ, 1945-1952, have been dispersed in Korea, Japan and the United States. This dispersed preservation was mainly due to the complicated decision-making process among Governor-General of Chosun, the Japanese Imperial government, and the GHQ. It was the top-down styled, dual decision making system, in which the critical policies, personnel, and budget had been decided in Imperial homeland, while their implementations were made in the colonies. As a result, the records documenting the whole process of domination have been preserved dispersedly in Japan and its colonies. In particular, the accounts of not yet paid Korean workers that was forced to mobilize in Japan’s colonial periods, which is emerging as the diplomatic conflict between Korea and Japan, had been dealt in the decrees of the Japanese government and policy-making of GHQ. It has already been changed to the problem as ‘economic cooperation’ from the ‘debt’. Also, the critical records for post-war compensation were preserved dispersedly in the United States and Japan under the top-down decision making process of GHQ-Japan. Therefore, the dispersed records of 1910-1952 about the colonial rules by the Imperial Japan and the post-war compensation on them must be re-investigated for the adequate documentation in the context of time and space. 본고는 일본 제국의 식민지 지배와 ‘전후보상’처리와 관련하여, 일본 제국주의와 조선 식민지, GHQ와 점령지 일본에서 이루어진 결재 과정과 이 과정에서 생산된 기록 원본의 출처를 밝히는 것을 목적으로 한다. 1910년부터 1952년까지를 대상으로 역사학과 기록학의 관점에서 분석하였다. 이 연구에서는 식민지 지배와 그 처리문제를 시공간적으로 연속선상에서 파악함으로써 제국과 식민지·점령지 기록에 대한 인식의 지평을 확대할 수 있는 기반을 마련하고자 하였다. 1910년부터 1945년까지 일제의 식민지 조선에 대한 강점지배에 대한 기록과 1945년부터 1952년까지 GHQ 점령기의 ‘전후보상’처리에 대한 결재원본은 한국, 일본, 미국 등에 분산 보존되어 있다. 가장 큰 원인은 일본제국정부와 조선총독부, GHQ와 일본종속정부의 결재구조에 있다. 즉, 중요정책, 인사, 예산에 대한 결재는 제국 본국에서 처리되고, 그 시행에 관한 결재는 식민지 및 종속국에서 처리되는, 상명하달식 이중결재구조 때문이다. 이에 따라 결재 원본도 일국에 완결적으로 보존되는 게 아니라 제국과 식민지 종속국가에 각각 분산·보존되어 상호 보완적 관계를 갖고 있다. 특히 최근 한일간 외교문제로 부각되고 있는 강제 동원된 조선인 미불금 문제는 GHQ의 정책결정과 일본정부의 정령 시행으로 공탁처리되어, ‘채무’에서 ‘경제협력’으로 둔갑해 버렸다. GHQ-일본의 상명하달식 결재시스템에 의해, ‘전후보상’을 위한 기본적인 원본기록 역시 미국과 일본에 각각 분산·보존 되게 되었다. 그러므로 1910년부터 1952년까지, 일제에 의한 식민지지배와 ‘전후보상’을 둘러싼 문제는 의사결정 프로세스와 기록의 출처 분석 등을 통해 시간적·공간적 측면에서 구조적·종합적으로 재인식될 필요성이 있다.

한국판 일반 건강 설문지의 요인 구조

박종익,김영주,조맹제 대한신경정신의학회 2012 신경정신의학 Vol.51 No.4

Objectives The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) has been used extensively in a variety of settings across countries. The objectives of this study were to test the factor structure and internal consistency of the GHQ-12 in the Korean general population and to test relationships among the scales, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the EuroQoL-5 Dimension Index (EQ-5D). Methods Data were acquired from a sample of 6,510 Koreans, aged 18 to 64 years old, who were randomly selected based on the 2005 census (2,581 men and 3,929 women). Participants completed the GHQ-12, the CES-D, and the EQ-5D. Exploratory factor analysis was performed for extraction of factor structures of the GHQ-12. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used for assessment of internal consistency. Finally, correlation analysis was performed for assessment of the relationships among the three instruments. Results Results of principal axis factoring with oblique rotation solution showed that the GHQ-12 was a measure of psychological distress with a two-factor structure that jointly accounted for 38% of the variance. The internal consistency of the GHQ-12 was high (Cronbach’s α=0.79). Concurrent validity indicated a significant positive correlation with the CES-D (r=0.68, p<0.01) and a significant negative correlation with the EQ-5D(r=-0.36, p<0.01). Conclusion Findings of this study demonstrated that the Korean version of the GHQ-12 has a two-factor structure and is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used for measurement of psychological distress in Korean adults. 본 연구에서는 지역사회에 거주하는 사람들을 대상으로한국어판 GHQ-12를 실시하였고, 이 자료를 바탕으로 탐색적 요인분석을 실시하여 요인 구조를 확인하였다. 분석 결과‘우울 및 불안’과 ‘사회적 역기능’ 2개의 요인이 추출되었으며, 같이 시행된 CES-D와는 양의 상관관계, EQ-5D와는 음의 상관관계를 보여서 공존타당도를 확인하였다. 한국어판GHQ-12는 향후 지역사회에서 정신건강의 선별조사로 유용하게 사용될 것으로 기대된다.

The 12-Item General Health Questionnaire as an Effective Mental Health Screening Tool for General Korean Adult Population

김영주,조맹제,박수빈,홍진표,손지훈,배재남,전홍진,장성만,이해우,박종익 대한신경정신의학회 2013 PSYCHIATRY INVESTIGATION Vol.10 No.4

Objective The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) has been used extensively in various settings across different cultures. This study was conducted to determine the thresholds associated with optimum sensitivity and specificity for the GHQ-12 in Korean adults. Methods Data was acquired from a sample of 6,510 Korean adults, ages 18 to 64 years old, who were selected from the 2005 Census (2,581 men and 3,929 women). Participants completed the GHQ-12 and the Korean Composite International Diagnostic Interview (K-CIDI). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted. Results The mean GHQ-12 score for the total sample was 1.63 (SD 1.98). The internal consistency of the GHQ-12 was good (Cronbach's α=0.72). Results from the ROC curve indicated that the GHQ-12 yielded greater accuracy when identifying mood and anxiety disorders than when identifying all mental disorders as a whole. The optimal threshold of the GHQ-12 was either 1/2 or 2/3 point depending on the disorder, but was mainly 2/3. Conclusion The Korean version of the GHQ-12 could be used to screen for individuals at high risk of mental disorders, namely mood and anxiety disorders.