高麗前期의 北方政策과 城郭體制

申安湜(Shin An-Sik) 역사교육연구회 2004 역사교육 Vol.89 No.-

This article aims at examining the method of territorial management in the early Koryo Dynasty centering around the predominant policy toward northern districts and the prevailing system of fortress. In the time leading up to its establishment, and even thereafter, the Koryo dynasty oversaw a chaotic internal state of affairs. Compounding this problem was the political chess match it faced on the foreign relations front due to a transition in power in dynastic China between the Tang(唐) and the Song(宋) and the ascendance of the northern Kitan(契丹) people following the fall of Balhae(渤海). The Koryo dynasty eventually solidified its power by incorporating the Shil1a(新羅) and the late Paekche(後百濟) dynasties into a unified Koryo kingdom under its rule. However, the threat imposed by foreign countries on its border still remained a major issue to address. One way to cope with the situation was to create a foreign policy grounded in strong territorial awareness and national defense. The Koryo dynasty recognized Shilla and Ancient-Koguryo(舊高句麗) lands as its own territory. Notably, the Koryo dynasty designated the Yalu River(鴨綠江) as the nation"s northernmost boundary. The need to preserve this boundary was an expression of Koryo"s desire to recapture the glory of the past Koguryo kingdom and determined its administrative policy toward the northern districts. The policy toward northern districts essentially embodied the prevailing "frontier spirit" in the Koryo dynasty. At the same time, this policy called for the management and consolidating of facilities in Yanggyae(兩界). As an extension of this, the fortress system in the Yanggyae area was a distinct articulation of the Koryo dynasty"s territorial awareness. The fortress itself was a tool to protect people and villages in times of emergency. Generally, municipal and military functions were considered before deciding on the location and the structure of the fortress. Early Koryo dynasty fortresses in the northern areas were typically constructed in strategic military spots to protect the capital, Kaegyong(開京). Most of these fortresses lined major routes such as Heungwhado(興化道). Heunggyodo(興郊道), Woonchoongdo(雲中道), and Sakbangdo(朔方道). During the rule of the first Emperor(太祖), the fortresses were constructed centering around Heunggyodo and Woonchoongdo. These locations were chosen to house fortresses due to the policy toward northern districts and the fact that the city of Seogyong(西京) had been singled out as an advance military base for that policy. Not only was Seogyong the second largest city after the capital Kaegyong, but it was also being considered as a strong candidate for a new capital. However, since it was close to the area of northern peoples, it was a vulnerable spot in the national defense. To address this weakness, the Koryo dynasty likely sought to expand its territory north of the river Cheongcheon(淸川江), which resulted in the construction of fortresses in those areas. This construction was based on their idea for expand toward the Yalu river and territory expansion centering around Yanggyae, but these move brought about war with the Kitan. From the reigns of Seongjong(成宗) to Hyonjong(顯宗), the dynasty engaged in three wars with the Kitan, which allowed the Koryo to speed up the consolidation of its national borders. Due to this, the reigns of Seongjong and Hyonjong managed to improve the System of Yanggyae, as well as other systems of local territorial management. Finally, in 1033, under the reign of Deokjong(德宗), the dynasty established "A Long Wall(千里長城)" along its northern territories. By establishing this wall, the borders of the Koryo dynasty began being clearly demarked, while allowing for vigorous territorial expansion. Ultimately, the establishment of the borders of the Koryo dynasty was founded in its administrative policy toward its northern districts, an

北方領土問題における語り部の研究 一元島民の「語り」への物語論的アブローチ一

髙橋誠 ( Takahashi Makoto ) 동서대학교 일본연구센터 2022 次世代 人文社會硏究 Vol.18 No.-

本稿は、かつて北方領土に居住していた元島民が語り部となって紡ぐ戦争体験の「語り」に着目し、語りの構造や、そこに表れる元島民の思いを考察し、北方領土の言説がどのような物語の相互作用の下で構築されているものかを明らかにするものである。 日本とロシアの間には、北方領土問題、すなわち、択捉島·国後島·色丹島·歯舞群島の帰属をめぐる問題が存在している。その北方領土の返還を求める国の文脈で、元島民の戦争体験が表象される。しかし、そのような文脈の中においても、領土喪失とその返還を求める国の物語と元島民の紡ぐ故郷喪失の個の物語には差異があると考えられる。本稿では、元島民の「語り」に物語論的アプローチをすることにより、これら2つの物語の、どのような相互作用により北方領土という言説が構築されているのかを明らかにすることを試みた。そのため、予備的に計量テキスト分析を用い、元島民の語りの構造を把握し物語の領域を分類した上で、質的な考察を進めた。そして、ナショナルな物語状況ともいうべき語りの場所性の中で、元島民の語りが故郷である「島」を結節点としたレトリックとして構成され、2つの物語が絡まり合いながら北方領土の言説が構築されていることを論じた。 This paper focuses on the stories of the war experience spoken by the former islanders who once lived in the Northern Territories, and considers the structure of the stories by narratological approach with preliminary quantitative text analysis. Through the analysis of the stories, this paper aims to clarify how the discourse of the “Northern Territory” is organized, focusing on the differences in thought between the former islanders and the Japanese government. Currently, Japan has some territorial disputes with neighboring nations, and one of the disputes is over the Northern Territories, which consist of Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan, and Habomai Islands. There is an event called “Katarukai” in which former islanders speak about their war experience. The former islanders tend to tell stories in the context of the government, which seeks the return of the Northern Territories, so called place identity, because “Katarukai” is subsidized by the government. However, even in such a context, there may be differences between the narratives of the government and former islanders. The stories of the former islanders may be told within the context of the government’s larger narrative of territorial loss, but the former islander’s story is one of individual loss of homeland, in which they were forcefully expelled from the Northern Territories to Hokkaido by Soviet troops. The narrative of the government, and the narrative of the former islanders need each other in some respects, and stand alone in others, but the word that ties them together is “island”, and the connection forms the rhetoric of the stories of the former islanders in “Katarukai,” and the overall discourse of “Northern territory”.

북방사 연구의 문제점

김위현 만주학회 2005 만주연구 Vol.- No.3

It must be essential for Korea to research into the history of Baeksan-Huksoo region north of the Korean peninsula, because her ancestors founded a nation for the first time and since then, had long managed the territory. The Chinese had described the history of our ancient nations in this territory in such chapters edited at the back of their histories as ’Eastern Barbarians’ Biographies' or 'Strange Territory', and since the 10th century, they had classified this territory into 'foreign countries'. Recently, however, they have included the histories of Koguryo and Balhae in those of their own history, calling these Korean nations 'their local governments'. For us Koreans, it must be a big problem how to cope with such a historical invasion from China. Therefore, it is deemed necessary to identify the problems of our researches into our history and set a desirable direction for our researches. The first problem is poor collection and sorting of the historical data as well as poor re­ searches into them. So, it is pre-requisite to collect the historical data dispersed in and out of Korea and sort them systematically to research into them. The second problem involves poor theories about the historical development of our nomadic and hunting age. The fact that we accept the theories suggested by the Western historians during early and mid-19th century without doubting them proves that we have not much endeavored to research into this turf of history. Third, it is necessary to research into the natural environment of this territory or the past no­madic and hunting areas. Since personality and industrial activities vary depending on weather or climate conditions, it is very important to research into the natural environment from a historical viewpoint. Fourth, it is also required of us to research into languages, custom, habits and religions of the people living in this territory. since this territory has long been influenced by its natives, Chinese and Koreans. Lastly, we face the following challenges for a desirable research into our history about the northern territory; (1) We need to correct the Chinese historical data in reference to our data. For example, 'History of Koiyo' may be a wealth of rich Historical data useful to complement the Chinese official History. (2) A cooperative researchers encompassing relevant disciplines is required. Namely, not only historians but also other professionals should cooperate with each other to solve our histor­ical problems. (3) It is essential to carefully review the past excavation reports and pending excavation spots. (4) It is deemed necessary to record the testimonies from the aged people living in this terri­tory, their legends and local languages and thereby, reinforce our historic database. (5) It may well be useful to collect in time the information about the researches into this terri­tory being conducted by local people and foreigners to be informed of the research trends.

러 ⦁ 일 북방영토 반환문제 지속의 구조: 일본의 전략과 정책결정 과정의 응집성을 중심으로

윤석상 사단법인 한국평화연구학회 2020 평화학연구 Vol.21 No.1

This study reviews the difficulties of negotiations between Japan and Russia over the Northern Territories/South Kuril Islands focusing on the political structure and strategies of Japan. The two countries had the chances of reaching an agreement like the case of the ‘Irkutsk Statement’, but they failed and got deadlocked. Four reasons can be taken. First, Japan just chose their strategies based on the political interest without taking its counterpart’s interests into consideration. Second, the policy inconsistencies of Japan caused by the characteristics of Japanese political institution hinders the negotiation process over the territory. Third, the policy decision making group failed to maintain its coherence which leads to being unable to maintain the consistent negotiation attitude. Fourth, the Northern Territory Policy of Japan was decided by a few political elites as the result of political consideration. All these four factors make the negotiation stay at a deadlock point. The lack of consistent organized policy and the absence of coherent state organization responsible for the problem solving in negotiations with Russia made the Japanese negotiation power undermined. In this context, the ‘Irkutsk Statement’ which could have provided clues to the settlement of the Northern Territories/South Kuril Islands just ended up at a declarative level. After the inauguration of Koizumi Government in 2001, Japanese political society’s conservative swing strengthened the politicians’ territorial claim over the Northern Territories/South Kuril Islands, which lead to the reexamination of the negotiation from square one. 본 연구는 일본과 러시아의 북방영토 반환문제를 둘러싼 협상의 어려움을 일본의 정치구조와 전략에 초 점을 맞추어 고찰하고 있다. 양국은 북방영토 반환문제와 관련하여 ‘이르쿠츠크 성명’을 통해 합의에 이를 수 있는 기회가 있었음에도 불구하고 협상의 성공에 이르지 못하고 진전 없는 교착상태에 빠져 있다. 그 이 유로 다음의 네 가지를 들 수 있다. 첫째, 일본의 전략적 선택이 상대방을 고려하지 않는 정치적 계산에 의 해 선택되어 왔다는 점이다. 둘째, 일본 정치의 제도적 특징에서 파생되는 정책의 비일관성이 반환협상을 가로막는 요인으로 작동한다. 셋째, 정책결정집단이 응집성을 유지하지 못함으로써 일관된 협상자세 유지 에 실패하였다. 넷째, 일본의 북방영토 정책은 정치상황에 따라 소수 정치엘리트에 의해 좌우되어 왔다. 이 러한 네 가지 요인들이 북방영토 반환교섭이 교착상태를 벗어나지 못하게 만들고 있다. 일본의 협상력 약화는 일관되고 체계적인 정책의 부재 및 러시아와의 협상을 주도하며 문제해결을 모 색해야 하는 응집력 있는 국가기구의 부재로부터 야기되었다. 이로 인해 북방영토 해결의 실마리를 제공 했다고 할 수 있는 러․일 양국의 ‘이르쿠츠크 성명’은 단지 선언적 수준에 머무르게 되었다. 특히 2001년 고이즈미 정권 출범 이후 일본 정치사회가 보수가 주도하는 분위기로 변화함으로써 정치인들에 의한 북방 영토 영유권 주장을 강화시켰고, 이는 북방영토 반환협상을 원점에서부터 재검토될 수밖에 없도록 만들었 음을 부인할 수 없다.

Trends in Incidence of Head and Neck Cancer in the Northern Territory, Australia, between 2007 and 2010

Jayaraj, Rama,Singh, Jagtar,Baxi, Siddhartha,Ramamoorthi, Ramya,Thomas, Mahiban Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2014 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.15 No.18

Incidence trends of head and neck cancer (HNC) have implications for screening strategies, disease management, guiding health policy making, and are needed to further oral cancer research. This paper aims to describe trends in age-adjusted HNC incidence rates focusing on changes across calendar period between 2007 and 2010 in Australian Northern Territory. Age-adjusted incidence rates of HNC were calculated for 2007-2010 using Northern Territory population based data assembled by Department of Health, Northern Territory Government of Australia. Changes in the HNC rate ratio (RR) and Estimated Annual Percentage Change (EAPC) between 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 were calculated. A total of 171 HNC patients were recorded by the Northern Territory Department of Health during the time period between 2007 and 2010, out of which, 135 were males (78.9% of male HNC patients) and 36 were females (21.1% of female HNC patients). In conclusion, HNC incidence rate has decreased in the Northern Territory Australian males but remains unchanged in Australian females. High incidences of HNC may be associated with the high smoking rate and high alcohol consumption in the Northern Territory. Continued monitoring of trends in HNC incidence rates is crucial to inform Northern Territory based cancer prevention strategies.

日本の三つの領土問題における「固有の領土」用語の比較

이홍천 대한일어일문학회 2023 일어일문학 Vol.100 No.-

This study aims to examine three territorial issues facing Japan, centered on the term inherent territory. The main objective is to examine and compare how the term "inherent territory" has been used in each territorial issue, when and under what circumstances, and how its meaning has changed. The phrase "inherent territory" is commonly used in descriptions of the Northern Territories, Dokdo (Japanese name Takeshima), and the Sengaku Islands on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website under the heading "Situation surrounding Japan." The term "inherent" means something that a person has since birth, and it is not valid to apply it to the concept of nation and territory that emerged in modern times. Nevertheless, the Japanese government uses the concept of "inherent territory" and does not provide any explanation for this. Based on the sentence on the website, it can be interpreted that "inherent territory" means "never been part of another country" (Northern Territories), "under international law" (Dokdo), and "historically and under international law." None of these interpretations succeed in conveying the meaning of 'inherent.' The results of the review can be summarized as follows. "Inherent territoriality" is not an internationally recognized concept. It has been used at different times and was first used in diplomatic negotiations with the Soviet Union. The concept of "inherent territory" has been inconsistent and changing. Nevertheless, the Japanese government is trying to spread the concept of "inherent territory" through textbook screening and authorization.

5~6세기 2개의 요동(遼東) -북위(北魏)의 천하관(天下觀)과 역사왜곡이 만들어낸 고구려(高句麗)의 요동과 북위의 요동

최진열 동북아역사재단 2018 東北亞歷史論叢 Vol.- No.62

Although Chinese history has no record on the periods of Koguryo’s occupation of Ryodong or occupation of Ryodong at all, Ryodong had been Koguryo’s territory from the fourth or fifth century until its collapse, as can be seen in a number of Chinese historical publications, including the Historical Records of the Three Kingdoms(三國史記) and the Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms(三國遺事). However, the History of Northern Wei(魏書) records as if Ryodong was in Northern Wei’s territory. Japanese researchers accepted this history distortion and produced maps showing Ryodong as part of Northern Wei’s territory. Such distortion of history results from attempts to give legitimacy to the Northern Wei Dynasty, whose rulers originated from the Tuoba tribe of Xianbei tribes and ruled the Northern Chinese territory, to argue that Northern Wei is the only legitimate dynasty of China and ruled the Whole China Proper through remote governance(遙領) and empty investiture(虛封) by appointing officials of prefectures and commanderies, and by investing fiefs in Koguryo and Southern Dynasties. In doing so, the Tuoba rulers were satisfied with the false recognition of being the only legitimate and unified dynasty, and Ryodong was a scapegoat of Northern Wei’s attempt to distort the outlook on the world and history. 이 논문은 학계에서 주목하지 고구려의 요동과 북위의 요동이 양립한 현상과 그 배경을 북위의 정통성과 천하관 분식이라는 시각에서 논증한 글이다. 『위서』에서는 요동·낙랑·대방·현토의 명칭이 발견된다. 특히 『위서』와 묘지명에 ‘요동’이 자주 등장하였다. 즉 요동군을 본적지로 한 인물들의 기록이 보였고, 일부는 관리를 추천하는 대중정에 임명되기도 하였다. 뿐만 아니라 『위서』에는 요동이 실토(實土)로 오인할 수 있는 기사가 있다. 고숭의 아버지 고잠은 헌문제 시기에 고구려에서 북위로 이주하여 ‘요동’에 거주했다고 한다. 헌문제 시기는 고구려 장수왕 시기였는데, 이때 요동은 북위의 땅이 아니라 고구려의 땅이었다. 따라서 고구려를 탈출한 고잠이 머무른 ‘요동’은 요수 서쪽, 특히 의무려산 서쪽 지역을 지칭하는 것으로 보는 것이 자연스럽다. 이민족이 세운 북위는 정통왕조임을 강조하기 위해 북위 중심의 천하관과 역사관을 만들었고 외교를 통해 이를 상대방에게 강요하였다. 그러나 현실적으로 북위가 지배하지 못하는 지역을 지배하는 것처럼 분식하기 위해 동진남조의 주군현명을 차용한 자사·태수 등 지방관 임명(遙領), 작위 수여(虛封)의 방법을 사용하였다. 이를 통해 북위는 남방 지역을 지배하여 중국의 유일한 통일왕조라는 허위의식을 만족시킬 수 있었다. 북위의 문서에 고구려의 영토인 요동을 자신의 영토인 것처럼 표기한 것도 이러한 허위의식의 결과였다.

일본과 러시아의 국경 문제의 형성과 전개 - 일본의 정책변화를 중심으로

이성환 배재대학교 한국-시베리아센터 2011 한국시베리아연구 Vol.15 No.1

This thesis is devoted to analyse one of the new dispute resolution approaches as a way of 50:50 on the basis of reviewing and reassessing the formation and development of Russo-Japanese border dispute. In particular, Soviet-Japanese Statements: Peace Declaration(1956) in which substantially formed territorial/border issues between the two countries, was discussed along with the letters of Matsumoto and Gromiko. And U.S. involvement in this process was also discussed. Russo-Japanese border dispute has been furthered and deepened by the New US-Japan Security Treaty(1960). Closer US-Japanese relationship made the Soviet Union declare ‘No territorial issues with Japan’, against which Japanese government set up ‘ Whole Return of the four Kuril islands(Northern Territories) to Japan Policy’. Thereafter, Japan posed ‘the principle of indivisibility of political and economic issues’, Russia maintained ‘the priority of Peace Treaty’. After all, the territorial dispute between Japan and the Soviet Union can be seen in the context of the Cold War system. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been emerged advantageous international environments for the conflict resolution between the two countries, accordingly the territorial policies of both countries showed signs of change. Moscow wanted the Japanese economic support, Tokyo knew that the Japanese territorial principle with the Kuril islands caused a backlash in Russia. As a result, there has been a little more rooms for the more flexible application of the principle of expanded balance between the two countries to the border dispute. The way of 50:50 raised in Japan is especially worth noting, since longstanding Sino-Russian border dispute resolved. The 50:50 way means 2 + α. Both sides have already shared the common points in returning Habomai and Shikotan(2) to Japan. The rest(+α) is Etorofu and Kunashiri. Therefore, depending on how to coordinate +α, in other words, the attribution of Etorofu and Kunashiri, at least theoretically, will be the possibility of dispute resolution between the two countries. However, the 50: 50 way is still discussed in Japan around civil circles and Russia's response on this is not materialized yet. But, this way of conflict resolution is worth considering enough, despite of all. 본 논문은 일본과 러시아의 국경 문제의 형성과 전개 과정을 검토하고, 문제해결방식의 하나로 새롭게 부각 된 50:50의 방식을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 특히 본 논문에서는 일본과 러시아 양국의 영토/국경 문제의 실질적인 형성 시점을 1956년 일․소 공동선언 및 공동선언과 함께 공개된 마쓰모토·그로미코 서한을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 그리고 이 과정에서의 미국의 개입에 대해서도 언급했다. 그 후 1960년의 신미일 안보 조약을 계기로 일소간의 남 쿠릴열도를 둘러싼 북방영토 분쟁은 더욱 증폭되었다. 신 조약을 통해 미일간의 관계가 더욱 긴밀해지면서 소련은 영토문제 부재론(不在論)을 제기하게 되고, 이에 대항하여 일본은 북방 4개 섬 반환론을 확립하게 된다. 양국의 이러한 주장은 일본의 정경불가분론과, 러시아의 선 평화 조약 체결론으로 정책화되어 갈등을 키워갔다. 이러한 측면에서 본다면, 일본과 소련 사이의 영토/국경 분쟁은 미국과 소련을 중심으로 냉전체제가 내면화된 것이라 할 수 있다. 따라서 냉전체제의 붕괴와 함께 양국의 영토/국경 정책도 조심스런 변화를 보였다. 러시아로서는 일본의 경제적 지원이 필요하며, 일본으로서는 정경불가분의 원칙이 러시아의 반발을 초래하여 역효과만 낳았다는 인식이 있었기 때문이다. 그 결과 양국 간에는 보다 유연한 확대균형의 원칙이 적용되면서 영토문제에서도 새로운 전략이 생겨날 여지가 생겼다. 특히 중․러 간의 국경문제 해결을 계기로 일본에서 본격적으로 제기되기 시작한 50 : 50방식은 주목할 필요가 있다. 일․러 양국이 2개 섬(하보마이, 시코탄) 반환에 대해서 어느 정도 공통 인식을 형성하고 있기 때문에 50 : 50방식은 2+a를 의미한다. 따라서 a를 어떻게 조정할 것인가에 따라, 적어도 논리적으로는, 일․러 간의 영토문제의 해결 가능성도 찾을 수 있게 된다. 구체적으로는 에토로후와 쿠나시리에 대한 처리문제이다. 그러나 50 : 50방식은 아직 정책단계로까지는 발전하지 못한 민간차원의 논의이며, 이에 대한 러시아의 반응도 아직 구체화되지 않고 있으나, 양국 간의 영토/국경 분쟁 해결의 한 방법으로서 충분히 고려할 가치가 있다고 하겠다.

독도 · 센카쿠제도 · 북방영토에 대한 일본정부의 차별적 영유권 인식

최장근 한국일본문화학회 2014 日本文化學報 Vol.0 No.61

The Japanese government require territorial sovereignty on Takeshima, Senkaku Islands, northern territories. Current Korea actually has managed Takeshima, and Japan has actually managed Senkaku Islands, and Russia has actually managed the Northern Territories. this study are analyzed Japan"s territorial disputes between 1950 to 1970. In particular, The Japanese government was not claimed the Senkaku Islands and the Northern Territoriesfor less than Dokdo. The reason is as follows. South Korea managed effectively before the signing of the peace treaty. The reason is that Union recognized Dokdo as Korea territory in the peace treaty. In addition, The Japanese government has recognized Dokdo as Korea territory implicitly in the peace talks between Korea and Japan. However, the Government of Japan strongly argued for the sovereignty on Northern Territory. Okinawa was returned to Japan from the United States. then the United States had given the Jurisdiction right of Senkaku Islands to Japan. Taiwan and China demanded Senkaku Islands territorial sovereignty to the Japanese. Currently Japan and China are surrounding on the ownership of Senkaku Islands. Japan are in trouble for China to claim ownership of Senkaku Islands. Japan got in trouble for Russia does not give up ownership of the archipelago kulril.

현대일본의 시민사회와 “북방영토”

오주영 ( Oh Ju Young ) 전북대학교 인문학연구소 2021 건지인문학 Vol.- No.32

일본 정부의 각 영토 갈등 지역에 대한 입장 및 대응 방식은 이전에는 3개 지역이 모두 다른 듯 보였으나, 갈수록 이들의 양상이 연계되거나 비슷해지는 부분도 보이고 있다. 이 글의 목적은 첫째, 남쿠릴열도 문제에 대한 민간 활동의 일본 정부의 예산 등의 실태 및 대응 방침을 살펴보고 검토. 둘째, 남쿠릴열도 문제에 대한 민간 차원의 활동 현황을 정리하는 것이다. 그리고 이를 통해 정부와 민간 활동의 연계성을 분석하고 향후의 추이를 살펴보는 것이다. 국가 간 역사 분쟁은 ‘역사문제’에서 비롯된다고 볼 수 있다. 양국의 정부 및 국민들이 상처의 역사를 외면하지 말고 동일하고 바르게 보아야 서로가 이해하는 미래가 있다고 생각한다. 본 연구는 일본의 역사왜곡(북방영토)에 대한 각종 이슈들에 대해 일본 국민들의 의견이 녹아날 수 있는 여러 단체들의 활동 양상을 되짚어 보고, 이를 통해 관련 활동에 대한 일본의 현황에 대해 정확하고 깊이 있게 이해하는데 도움이 되고자 한다. 현재 국내 학계에서는 북방영토에 대한 일본과 러시아의 정부 활동 및 국내의 한일간 영토 분쟁에 대한 분석 연구는 많으나, 일본 내 민간 활동에 대한 정리 및 분석 등에 대한 연구는 미진한 수준이다. 기초로 하는 영토문제의 경우, 어느 나라든 민심을 배제한 정책은 구현되기 어려울 것이다. 이러한 반증으로 각국 정부의 예산 투입 추이 및 정책을 분석, 정리하면 그 흐름을 파악할 수 있다. Previously, all three regions seemed to be different in the Japanese government's position and response to each territorial conflict region. However, there are parts where their patterns are increasingly linked. First, the purpose of this article is to examine and review the actual conditions and countermeasures of the Japanese government's budget for private activities on the issue of the Northern territories. Second, it is to summarize the status of activities at the private level on the issue of the Northern territories. And through this, the connection between the government and private activities is analyzed and future trends are examined. It can be seen that historical disputes between countries stem from ‘history issues’. I think there is a future in which governments and people of both countries understand each other only when they see the same and right without turning a blind eye to the history of wounds. This study aims to help to accurately and in-depth understanding of Japan's current status of related activities by examining the activities of various organizations that can incorporate Japanese people's opinions on various issues on Japan's history distortion (Northern Territory). Currently, there are many studies in domestic academia on government activities between Japan and Russia on northern territories and territorial disputes between Korea and Japan in Korea, but studies on private activities in Japan are insufficient. In the case of the underlying territorial problem, it will be difficult to any country to implement a policy that excludes public sentiment. With this disproving, the trend of budget input and policies of each government can be analyzed and summarized to understand the flow.