정전협정 체결 후 비무장지대 반공포로수용소 발생사건

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The study analyzed the accident happened in the DMZ Anticommunist POW Camp after signing an Armistice agreement. The Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission(NNRC) was organized in order to resolve the problems of non-repatriation prisoners of war after signing an Armistice agreement and the Custodian Force India(CFI) was mobilized for direct management of POWs. The POWs were transferred to the DMZ and the NNRC’s Indian delegates and the CFI entered the Korean peninsula. However, the Korean government had hostility toward the Indian government since the Korean War and banned them from entering the South Korean territory as they landed on the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, the Indian delegates and the CFI had to move to the DMZ using the US Air Force aircraft. And the POWs in the Anticommunist POW Camp were in confrontation with the CFI as they thought they were pro-communist. In this circumstance, the CFI’s massacre of anticommunist POWs was occurred on the first and the second day of October. Korean government officials and political parties blamed the CFI for the case on the public press and the Korean national assembly organized a committee for fact finding. In addition the Taiwanese government appealed to the international society through demonstrations and rally and encouraged Chinese living in Korea to carry on the movement to oust the CFI. The United States has focused on the Korean situation and the atmosphere in India and the case was covered up with the US’s mediation. Later, two trials were opened regarding Chinese POWs and Korean POWs at the Camp. Regarding the first case, charge was withdrawn as the court could not proceed with the transfer of the witnesses to the Communist army. The second case could not proceed further as the trial period was extended but the date for the release of the POWs approached. At the time when the trial on the case proceeded, the Korean government argued that the Indian army did not have the judicial power to process the trial on the POWs but the Indian army ignored the argument. Later on January 21st, 1954 all the POWs were released and the POWs who were charged were also released one month later and returned to Korea and Taiwan. And the NNRC was dismissed and the CFI returned to India.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 정전협정 체결과 미송환 포로의 비무장지대 이동
• Ⅲ. 인도관리군의 반공포로 학살사건
• Ⅳ. 반공포로의 재판, 포로 석방과 인도관리군의 귀국
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 여용덕, "휴전회담과 포로 교환" 27 : 61-67, 2007

2 A. V. 토르쿠노프, "한국전쟁의 진실과 수수께끼" 에디터 2003

3 이선우, "한국전쟁기 중립국 선택 포로의 발생과 성격" 한국역사연구회 (90) : 317-358, 2013

4 이상호, "한국전쟁기 미군의 공산포로 '미국화 교육'" 한국역사연구회 (78) : 421-449, 2010

5 조성훈, "한국전쟁과 포로" 선인 2010

6 인도국방부 역사부, "한국에서의 인도관리군 역사 1953~1954"

7 K. S. 티마야, "판문점 일기" 소나무 1993

8 국회특별위원회, "특별위원회활동개요"

9 시성문, "중국인이 본 한국전쟁" 한백사 1991

10 장택석, "중국군 포로의 6･25전쟁 참전기" 국방부 군사편찬연구소 2009

11 "조선일보"

12 박태균, "정전협정인가 휴전협정인가" 역사문제연구소 (73) : 88-92, 2005

13 김경수, "인도와 한국전쟁" 한국학술정보 2006

14 박영실, "반공포로 63인의 타이완행과 교육 및 선전 활동" 한국학중앙연구원 37 (37): 64-89, 2014

15 조성훈, "미국자료를 통해 본 휴전협상의 지연 요인 연구: 포로문제를 중심으로" 49-70, 2000

16 "동아일보"

17 "대한민국 국회속기록"

18 제성호, "남북정상회담과 국군포로ㆍ납북자문제" 한국전략문제연구소 14 (14): 143-179, 2008

19 華僑志編纂委員會, "韓國華僑志" 華僑志編纂委員會 1958

20 "臺灣 國史館 소장 자료"

21 김찬완, "The Role of India in the Korean War" 국제지역연구센터 13 (13): 21-37, 2010

22 NARA, "RG 59, General Records of the Department of State, Decimal File 1950~54, Box. 3027~3029"

23 R. R. Krishnan, "Indo-Korean Relations Since 1947" 3 : 157-167, 1998

24 김승태, "6ㆍ25전란기 유엔군측의 포로정책과 기독교계의 포로선교" 한국기독교역사학회 (21) : 37-67, 2004

25 오세희, "65포로수용소" 만인사 2000