임나 7국의 위치에 대한 재론 = Re-discussion on the Locations of the Alleged Seven Countries Belonging to Imna

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the Edo period of Japan, Arai Hakuseki(新井白石) described Imna Gi-mun, which was passed down from the family of Gil-jeon(吉田連), as the origin of Imna-bu(任那府), and Daisuke Hayashi(林泰輔) connected the story of Yeom Seung-jin(塩乘津) and『Nihon Shoki(日本書紀)』 Sungshin-gi, claiming that Mimana Nihon-fu(任那日本府) is the Japanese part of Yamato installed in Dae-gaya.
In Japanese colonial era, Japanese colonial historians equated Imna described in『Nihon Shoki』 with Gaya and designated the country names of『Nihon Shoki』 in the Gaya area of Korean land, and their theory of Imna=Gaya has been a general theory so far.
Yasukazu Suematsu(末松保和) designated ‘Imna Seven Kingdoms’ in the『Nihon Shoki』 Sungshin-gi in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula and Gaya area based on Eumsangsa(音相似: a method of matching similar notes with each other). Reviewing his nomination, it can be seen that Imna’s historical and geographical characteristics shown in Baekje Samseo(百濟三書) cited in『Nihon Shoki』 or『Nihon Shoki』 do not match the historical and geographical characteristics of Gaya in Korean literature data. After all, his appointment of Imna was not reasonable. In addition, records related to Imna appearing in Korean historical records such as the Stele of King Gwanggaeto, the Gangsu-yeoljeon, and the Jinkyeong Daesa Pagoda cannot be found as solid evidence that Imna means Gaya as in previous studies.
The same goes for Imna, which is seen in Chinese historical records such as 「Yangjikgongdo(梁職貢圖)」, so it can be seen that Imna at that time shows the advancement of Baekje into the sea such as Tsushima and Northern kyushu and the Japanese archipelago. Therefore, the Imna=Gaya theory needs to be reviewed and more in-depth research is needed.