國際貿易과 經濟發展

林種哲 서울大學校商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1974 經濟論集 Vol.13 No.1

마케팅機能에 관한 分析的 硏究(序說) : 특히 企業目的과의 關聯下에서 Especially Relating with the Business Objective

金元銖 서울大學校 商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1966 經濟論集 Vol.5 No.3

Ⅰ. Preface The functional approach of marketing had been adopted prevailingly in the earliest study of marketing, while the system and classification of these functions are seemingly not escaped from the realm of ambiguity and disorder. The proper reason why marketing students could not develop the widely approved coherent system on marketing function, was solely depending upon the lack of complete recongnition of the nature of these heterogeneous and inconsistent group of activities. Since marketing functions are the activities performed by a business enterprise in order to get a creative adaptation to its changing environment, it usually tends to be differentiated according to its environmental characteristics, because it has a feature of controllable means of the business enterprise. On a common sense in economic history, it is a fact that the business enterprise has been emerged in economic society since capitalistic mode of production prevailed. Therefore, it is natural that the assumption on business enterprise that is designed to make a profit, are generally approved by marketing student as a basic concept. And thus most of students are considering that the business enterprise has a only one profit-seeking objective. When we start on studying the marketing function, hence, we could not deny the influence of this pseudo-economic theorem which usually hammers our frame of logical reasoning. Therefore, I dare to try to reflect the meaning of this pseudo-economic theorem in order to get rid of these boundaries of thinking frame. In this sense, this article intends to analyze the marketing functions with the heaviest emphasis on the interrelation between these functions and objective of business enterprise. Ⅱ. What is Business Enterprise As a preliminary process of studying the marketing functions, it is necessary to work out for new concept-buliding of the business enterprise, since that is a component of whole function of business enterprise. The conceptual work for business enterprise must start with realtion to the essence of economy. Because enterprise is an organ of economic society in a social sense, as well as an economic existence for profit-making in an individual sense. Hence it enjoys the dual existence in this economic society; the social one, as a producing institution of the want-satifying materials, that is, products, and the individual one, as a profit-seeking organization for the entrepreneur (it might be well to include the manager and employee under the system of absentee ownership.) The essence of the both economies just above mentioned are consisted of the phenomena or activities of acquiring and utilizing the want-satisfying materials for the satisfaction of the want of haman beings. Here, we cold recognize that there are two main subfunctions of economies, the one is an acquirement of goods and, the other, utilization of goods, that is, production and consumption. At the earliest ancient days, these two subfuctions were integrated into the single economic subject. This means that there would be no such fact as the segregation of producer and consumer was materialized. This system is usually referred as self-want-satisfying-economy. When human beings, however, could not satisfy sufficiently their own want with their produces, they learned the advantage of specialzation and exchange of the produces. Thus, the division of labor, in a social sense, has segregated the single economic subject to specialized economic subjects, that is a producer and a consumer. As a natural consequence of the preceding reasoning, I dare to define that the business enteprise is an economic institution having dual existence, and is formed though the process of simultaneous, but double formation, namely, both in social and individal. The one is the social formation of business enterprise in an abstractive way. It will be formed when entrepreneur bears the function of social production (for others, not for himself ) which had been departed from the producer-consumer, as a full time business. This business enterprise itself was designed to devote to profit-making, but its production and distribution functions in a social sense are not performed for the attainment of profit objective. These functions are performed unconsciously by the entrepreneur as a tool of profit-making. Social formation of the business is realized automatically when its individual formation is completed. Usually enterpreneurs did not know the significance of contribution to the social formation by his own individual economic activities. The other is the individual or realistic formation of business enterprise. This is a sensible and concrete one in reality. It is only after entrepreneurs make up his mind to make a profit through the repetitive production and marketing of goods which could satisfy the wants of the others, not himself, and they invest their accumulated capital, that enterprises have been formed. When individual business is established, the business enterprise in a social sense, is simultaneously formed and functions as a socio-economic institution. And thus, individual business activities are filtered through the wall between an induvidual existence and a social one and bocomes to exert a social influence or effect on the social economy. Ⅲ. The Objectives of Business Enterprise Needless to say, the businesse enterpris has a dual existence. It must be able to satisty the want of different economic subjects, that is, consumer and businessman. The activity of satisfying the consumers want becomes a social objective because the function of the business production has segregated from consumers and entrusted to producers. The other activity for the satisfaction of entrepreneur or business participants compels to attain the purpose of the profit-seeking and it becomes individual or profit objectives. Though satisfaction of want means same economic activity in economics, but in a specific sense it differs each other. The one is acquirement of physical products for others, namely, for market, whereas the other is to make a profit, or to earn surplus for entrepreneurs themselves. For this reason, business enterprise should accomplish its dual objectives by the effort for single profit-seeking, because the individual business enterprise produces "the others-want-satisfying materials" for sale to get a profit. These two objectives usually conflicts each other. The reason for this conflict lies in the egoism of the human beings. Entrepreneur, as a profit-seeker, usually sells his product for the highest price possible to earn higher margins, but consumer resists and reacts to these entrepreneurial behavior, because of the unfitness of goods sold to his own wants. It might be assumed that the production ought to be done for the members of society, not for business alone. These two objectives might be synthesized in one term, long-term profit maximization It means business enterprise should enjoy the long-term existence on the good will of the consuming public and get a reasonable profit which corresponds to its cost of social function and of innovation. Ⅳ. The Differentiated Business Pattern under Different Economic Environment Essentialy, the business enterprise is destined to carry out these two business objectives in good harmony, but in the fromer days the different socio-economic conditions have allowed the business a chance of pursuit of one-sided business objectives, especially that of the profit-seeking. As a matter of fact, according to the meaning of business enterprise which has been conceptualized through preceding discussion, it is true that the ever- changing pattern of business enterprise is the one managed under the purpose of balanced fulfillment of its dual objective. The frequent referrings to social responsibilities of business enterprises seem to have an objective ground on this fact, not on an ethical one. Most of the entrepreneurs, from ancient to present-day, however, have been making their effort only for the pursuit of individual economic objective as a natural consequence of making adaptation to its environment which allows the possibility of sole profitseeking. ? For the purpose of empirical study of this topic, I have made a try, in turn, to construct the model for testing the relation between the business patterns and its economic surroundings. It is a graph composed of two output curves, production and marketing which plots the volume according to its time series. Ⅴ. The Relation Between the Function of Marketing and Business Objective The synthesized, essential business objective is long-term profit maximization. According to accounting system, business profits are calculated by minusing the business cost form business revenue. The business revenue is earned by the sale of the produced goods, and in a quantitative terms, it is accounted by multi- plying the unit price to the number of the product sold. Thus, sales targets essentially coincides with the business objective in the long run. Modern businesses used to rely on the increasing of sales volume in order to get more revenues, not on the price-up. For this reason, mass production be- comes general business mode and the business grows larger and larger and it follows that mass marketing is an essential characteristics of modern business. Ⅵ. The Relation Between the Function of Marketing and Production Production function is a physical manufacturing process in a factory, and the aim of production lies in the manufacturing of the products which are destined to be sold. It might be naturally assumed that the purpose of production itself is to manufacture the physical stock. This function begins with physical raw materials and ends with physical products. If producion function is to be performed, it is necessary that the decision, on what and how much products should be produced must be made up by entrepreneurial function. The problem of what products is relation to the qualitative production and how much product, to quantitative production. These functions have an attribute of marketing. The former is known as consumer, product research, and product planning and the latter, as sales forecasting and marketing planning. These functions might he called as leading marketing-functions. The product specification which decides the form, disign, size and color, etc. of products is prepared by former function, and the production order which regulates the scale and size of production, by latter one. Of course these functions are well known as a part of marketing functions. Once after these functions are performed, physical production activities are carried out by employee with the raw material through technical process, and at the end it produces the products coherent to the requirement of product specification and production order. And thus the stock of physical products neaped in the warehouse is to be sold, it is necessary of the performance of lagging marketing function. The products processed under the manufacturing engineering, would possess a value emdodied through the process of manufacturing and the value is an ability of physical and psychological satisfaction of consumers' want rather than that of producers. Consequently, it is possible to define that the qualitative leading marketing-function is a function of visualizing the product in imaginative process through translating the psychological want of consumer into physical form, and production is a function of making up the physical product which is equivalent to imaginative form of physical product. Ⅶ. The Anaysis of Marketing Functions The Defintion Committee on Marketing terms of American Marketing Association has defined that the marketing function is a major specialized activities performed in marketing, but its report have pointed out that there are still chaoses in marketing functional studies. It goes on ; there is no generally accepted list of marketing functions, probably those most generally recognized are transportation or traffic management, storage, market financing, risk management, selling, grading, assembling, standardization and buying. Merchandising is sometimes included in the list although many students regard it as a broader function lying between marketing and production. Some of these activities are broad business functions having special marketing implications, others are peculiar to the marketing process. In the first category are traffic management, market financing and risk management, in the second group are buying, selling and assembling. Under this form students of marketing have sought to squeeze a heterogeneous and inconsistent group of activities. For example, the functions of assembling and dividing, if such functions exist, are performed through buying, selling and transporting. Grading, standardization, and packaging are adjuncts of selling, such functions as assembling, storage, and transporting are broad general economic functions, while selling and buying are essentially individual in character. All these discrete groups we attempt to crowd into one class and label "marketing functions." If we take account of this comments, we may easily find that there is an ambiguity and disorderness in marketing functional studies. Consequently, it is natural to do a work for reclassifying the heterogenous and inconsistent group of activity into the objective and coherent system. It may be broadly classified into two categories: socio-economic distribution function and a managerial marketing function. Though the former is performed unconsciously by a business enterprise, it functions automotively as a coordinator of a social ecoonmy. The economic distance can be bridged by the performance of this function. The kind of economic distance and the functions correspending to it, are as follows: 1. Personal (title, ownership) distance∼exchange 2. Place 〃 ∼transportation 3. Time 〃 ∼storage 4. Qualitative 〃 ∼exchange 5. Quantitative 〃 ∼exchange 6. Communication 〃 ∼communication The latter one is motivated purposedly by a entrepreneur for the attainment of business profit, and E. D. Mcguarry illustrates one of the possibilities of classifying it, such as 1. Contractual ∼selling, buying, 2. Merchandising ∼product planning or merchandise selection 3. Pricing 4. Propaganda∼sales promotions, a part of personal selling, advertising 5. Termination∼sales, delivery, packaging, collecting, service A tentative trial system of my own classification is as follows, 1. Leading marketing functions ⑴ Qualitative leading function∼the function relating to product ⑵ Quantitative leading function∼the function relating to sales potential 2. Lagging marketing function ⑴ Sales promotion function∼advertising and sales promotion ⑵ Sales disposal function∼delivery, contract, collect and service Ⅶ. A Modern Comprehension of Marketing Process Leading functions are performed in advance of physical production and it directs the orientation of both qualitative and quantitative production. In other words, leading marketing functions have a role of standard in the production process. Thus the leading function exerts an influence on production stage in order to have product to be fit to the consumers' want and set the volume of products. Therefore, the costs of these leading functions are transformed into the value of product itself. we may conclude that the leading function differs functionally from the lagging one, because the latter is originally performed after the physical production has fulfiled. Both leading marketing function and production function are interrelated each other and regulate the phsical production process and render the product a marketing push power. This is equivalent to the pull power of the consumer. This push power means the degree of physical realization of consumer's want satisfying power by a business enterprise. Ⅸ. The Analysis of the Functioning Process of Lagging Function The lagging function is performed after the physical production and comprised by the sales promotion function and the sales disposal function. The latter is to be performed whenever transactions are made. For example, contractual, delivery, collection, service, packaging and packing, etc. Sales promotion activities are the function of facilitating the marketing in a business sense, but it is possible to imagine that it is a function of facilitating the buying function through giving a impact to a consumer. Therefore this function is performed when the push power of the product is weak, that is, when the pull power of the consumer is weak, sales promotion activities are done in order to sell the product to the consumer though cultivating the consumer pull power. If we introduce numerical terms, such as percentage, say, the push power of the product is 80 % and hypothetical maximum limit is 100%, hypothetical conclusion is that it is necessary to perform the sale promotion activities equivalent to 20% of pull power. Because, in a psychological engineering process, sales promotion activities exert its influence only through the gradual psychological change of the mind of the consumer ; that is, attention, interest, desire, memory or conviction and action. Ⅹ. Conclusion This hypothetical and exploratory studies cast a light on the problem of defining the business enterprise as a existence relating without any ism or age. Hence, according to this hypothetical frame of business enterprise, the essential character of the business enterprise would be more clearly closed up and then it will devote to facilitating the comprehension of the mechanism and patternal features of modern business enterprise. And the ever-changing, essential business patterns would be enable us to pick out the reason why specific patternal life of business enterprises of some ages were a natural consequence of adaptation by that business enterprise to its specific surroundings. It seems probable that this tentative work for searching the essence of the business enterprise will give the possibilities of theorizing the knowledge system of innovated one about business and the marketing, and this innovated system of knowledge would be valuable to deduct the type and the kind of the patternal life to-be of future business enterprise.

經濟行爲에 대한 社會學的 接近(序說)

金晉均 서울大學校 商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1970 經濟論集 Vol.9 No.2

英國經濟衰退의 諸原因에 관한 硏究(其Ⅰ)

姜命圭 서울大學校 商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1968 經濟論集 Vol.7 No.2

日本植民統治의 經濟的遺産에 關한 硏究

安秉直 서울大學校商科大學韓國經濟硏究所 1965 經濟論集 Vol.4 No.4

As a younger student of colonial history, I an deeply interested in the modern colonial history of Korean whose destiny depended upon the history of capitalism in Japan. Among the various types of colonies, the most interesting type of colony to the students of underdeveloped countries may be the colony that was founded upon feudal society by the western or eastern imperialism. The typical colonies of this are Korea, India, China, Indonesia, Indo-China, though China was half-colonial nation. This type of colonies went through the three stages of development, as the western capitalism developed from commercial capitalism and industrial capitalism to imperialism. Of the three stages of the colonial development, the third stage of them is the subject of our study, not noly because it, as the nearest past of the colonial nations, is the causes of their proverty and misery, but because the study of it will illuminate the way of winning them. Socialists and critical "bourgeois" economists of colonization alike agree on the following conclusion of the studies of colonization. (1) Where the western or eastern capitalists were faced by established society with rich and ancient cultures, still precapitalist or in the embryonic state of capitalist development, they rapidly determined to extract the largest possible gains from the host countries, and to take their loot home. Thus they engaged in outright pounder or in plunder thinly veiled as trade, seizing and moving tremendous wealth from the places of their penetrations. (2) For the unilateral transfers of wealth from the colonial countries to the imperial capitalists provide the prerequisites of capitalism in the precapitalist or in the embryonic state of capitalist development. By breaking up the age-old patterns of the agricultural economy, and by forcing shifts to the production of exportable crops, Western capitalism destroyed the self-sufficiency of the rural society that formed the basis of precapitalist order in all countries of its penetration, and rapidly widened and deepened the scope of commodity circulation. By outright-in many countries, massive-seizure of peasant-occupied land for plantation purpose and other uses by foreign enterprise and by exposing their rural handicrafts to the widening competition of its industrial exports, it created a vast pool of pauperized labor. Enlarging thus the area of capitalist activities, it advanced the evolution of legal and property relation attuned to the needs of a market economy and established administrative institutions required for their enforcement. Only in order to expand and tighten the economic and political grip on the areas of its domination, it forced the diversion of some of their economic surplus to the improvement of their systems of communication, to the building of railroads, harbors, and highways, providing thereby as a by-product the facilities needed for profitable investment of capital. (3) Accelerating with irresistable energy the maturing of some of the basic prerequisites for the development of a capitalist system, the intrusion of Western capitalism in the now underdeveloped countries blocked with equal force the ripening of other. The removal of a large share of the effected countries' previously accumulated and currently generated surplus could not but cause a serious setback to their primary accumulation of capital. Their being exposed to ruinous competition from abroad could not but smother their fledgling industry although the expansion of commodity circulation, the pauperization of large numbers of peasants and artisans, the contact with western technology, provided a powerful impetus to the development of capitalism, this development was forcibly shunted off its normal course, distorted and crippled to suit the purposes of Western imperialism. Based on the above three general conclusions of the studies of colonial history, we can propose the following three questions. What importance had the colonial countries to the imperial as the market of goods and capital investment of the imperial? How much devoted the colonial countries to the imperial as suppliers of foods and raw materials to the imperial? What were the economic conditions on the part of the colonial countries that enabled the imperial powers to do the above. This thesis aims to illuminate the basic characteristics of the relation between Korea and Japan in the colonial period and the legacies from the Japanese colonial control which now are the causes of the poverty and misery of Korea. Ⅰ. Korea as a market of the goods and capital investment of Japanese capitalism Korea as a market of Japanese capitalism went through two stages: Korea as a market of consumption goods of Japan and as a market of capital investment of her. The first stage begins roughly in 1876 and ends in 1929; the second begins in 1930 and ends in 1945. The demarkation of the stages is based on the importance of Korean market as the market of Japanese consumption goods or that of her production goods. The statistics of foreign trade of Korea show that in the constitution of imported goods from Japan the share of consumption goods always exceeds that of production goods over the whole period of her colonial control. But capital import accompanies not only the import of capital goods, but also that of consumption goods. The constitution of imported goods from Japan does not matter here. The important criterion of the period demarkation lies on the role of each commodity by which the foreign trade was led. The importance of Korea as a Japanese export market is appreciated by the proportion of the whole export of Japan which is destined to Korea. The statistics of foreign trade whow that the importance of Korea as a Japanese export market steadily increased from 6.1% in 1910-12 to 21.5% in 1934-36. After 1930 Korea was a largest foreign market of Japan. But the importance of Korea as a foreign market of Japan does not limit to the proportion of Japanese export of which Korea had taken. When we scrutnize the statistics of foreign trade, we find that the proportion of Japanese export of which Korea had taken increased or decreased according to the conditions of Japanese foreign trade, though the proportion of which Korea had taken increased steadily through the Japanese colonial control. The proportion increased in the year of depression and decreased in the year of boom. That is, Korea as the foreign market of Japan should sacrificed her own interest for sake of that of Japan. Korea as a foreign market of Japanese consumption goods had taken an important role. The proportions of consumption goods of the imports which were taken from Japan were 66.3% in 1919, 58.7% in 1929, 52.7% in 1935 and 49.8% in 1939, of which the shares of the goods of secondary industry were 55.5%, 47.7%, 41.2%, 38.0% and 38.3% respectively. Of the consumption goods, tissues, clothing, yarn, sugar and manufactures thereof and wine were the main stocks. Each of tissues and manufactures thereof, clothing and accessarieis thereof, yarn and the like, which were imported to Korea, took 10%, 18.1%, and 7.4% of the whole exports of each commodity in 1934-36. The tissues and manufactures thereof took 30-40% of the whole imports from Japan in the same period. Form the above, we can conclude that Korea was not only the largest foreign market of Japanese capitalism, but also the safety-value of it. Returning to the capital import from Japan, the active import of it had begun in 1930. The year of 1930 was not only the turning point of the world capitalism, but also that of the Japanese. As the depression of 1929 which was begun in the weakest link of capitalism prevailed all over the world, there were large stocks of capital in capitalist country which sought the investment opportunity. The financial capital of Japan found it in Korea. The capital imports of Korea from Japan began as early as 1882. But until 1930 the amount of them was not so great, and they themselves were small and medium-sized. The imports of large monpolistic capital were few but social over-head capital. The statistics of capital imports from Japan proves that the capital which was invested in Korea by the Japanese amounted to 7,329 million yen in 1931. Because these statistics show only the volume of the Japanese investment in Korea, which consisted in original capital investment, reserve funds and valuation profit, they do not tell how much capital imported from Japan, but we can use them as indicators which reflect the capital imports from Japan. Moreover, when we compare the capital imports from Japan based on the capital investment by the Japanese, we should remind that, of the capital investment which was done until 1931, the Japanese capital made in Korea was great. The capital investment by the Japanese in Korea during the early period of their colonial control was made in the process of the "Primitive accumulation" in which capital was accumulated in the hand of capitalists by plunder, violence, deception, usury, etc. This gives positive proof of the fact that the active capital imports from Japan began after 1930. Capital imports usually accompany the imports of capital goods. According to the foreign trade statistics, the proportion of capital goods of the whole imports increased from 31.3% in 1912, 34.6% in 1919, 33.6% in 1929 and 38.0% in 1935 to 43.9% in 1939. Especially the increase in machinery imports was very high: from 5.7% in 1912, 9.2% in 1919, 7.1% in 1929 and 8.8% in 1935 to 14.1% in 1939. The above statistics show that the increase of capital goods imports show comparatively rapid increase after 1935. This is not the whole story. In the early stage of the colonial control, the large capital goods importing countries were Western Europe and the United States. The capital goods imports from Japan were very little. If we consider this, we find that the capital goods tell that imports from Japan increased faster than the above statistics tell. By 1931 the capital invested in Korea by the Japanese amounted to 2,128 million yen. It consisted of exchequer investment, investment by corporate bodies, floating capital and investment by noncorporate bodies. The capital investment of them amounted to 898, 434, 625 and 433 million yen, respectively. Of the investment of corporate bodies, the capital invested in manufacturing was 26.9% of it, and others were invested in land, commerce and banking. But in 1941 the investment of corporate bodies amounted to 3,941 million yen which is compared to the 434 million yen in 1931. Form the above statistics we can conclude that after 1930 the capital investments in Korea by the Japanese were conducive to the industrialization of Korea in spite of its distortion, while before 1930 they engaged in the exportation of the natural resources and accumulated wealth in Korea by means of plunder, violence, deception, usury, etc. The contribution of Korea as a foreign market of Japanese investment can be appraised by the share taken by Korea of the whole foreign capital investment of Japan. But we are to appriase it with the proportion taken by Korea of the whole exports of capital goods of Japan. The method of the latter will help us to understand the colonial attributes of the capital imports from Japan. The main stocks of capital goods imports from Japan were minerals and manufactures thereof, ores and metals, metal manufactures, and machinery. The proportion of minerals and manufactures thereof of the whole export of the same commodity from Japan which is destined to Korea increased from 25.5% in 1922-24 to 42.3% in 1934-36, that of ores and metals from 10.7% to 28.5%, that of metal manufactures from 8.0% in 1916-18 to 30.5% in 1934-36, and that of machinery from 7.2% in 1916-18 to 26.4% in 1934-36. The above statistics show that the share of capital goods imports of Korea from Japan exceeds on the average 30% of the whole capital goods exports of Japan during the later period of the colonial control of Korea. This reflects that the economic structure of Japan was subordinate to the Western capitalist countries and imperial to Korea and other Far Eastern countries. Ⅱ. Korea as a supplier of foods and raw materials of Japanese capitalism From the early days of the modern trade Korea supplied foods, mineral products and gold-and-silver to Japan. Agricultural raw materials, e.g. various kind of hides and cotton, were important exportable commodities. But during the early period of the Japanese colonial control rice and beans and pulses were the main stocks of exportable commodities, while minerals gained the importance as exportable commodities in the later period of it. Korea as a supplier of foods to Japan gives the worth of the name of Korea as a colony of Japan. Rice alone takes about 50% of the whole exports of Korea. And the rice which was exported to Japan occupied nearly 30% of the whole output of her. The export of beans and pulses occupied 30% of the whole output of her. The contribution of Korea as a supplier of foods to Japan is appraised by the following. The rice export from Korea to Japan takes 67.9% in 1931-39 and 67.6% in 1934-36 of the shortage of that of Japan. That of beans and pulse takes 30-35% of the shortage of that of Japan on the average over the years of 1910-36. Korea as a supplier of the raw materials to the Japanese industry had also an important role. Comparing with Japan, minerals produced in Korea were abundant not only in their kind but also in their deposits. The proportion of the mineral export to its output of Korea reached to 10-15% before 1920, but after 1920 it reached to 30-35%. The contribution of the mineral export to Japan was 5-10% of the whole imports of Japan.

韓國의 勞動市場構造

裵茂基 서울大學校商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1971 經濟論集 Vol.10 No.3

「케임브리지」學派 經濟學의 生成過程 : 「마샬」經濟學의 問題意識을 中心으로 Biographical Revaluation on the Marshallian System of Economic Thought

姜命圭 서울大學校商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1974 經濟論集 Vol.13 No.1

國際通貨基金(IMF)과 韓國經濟

趙淳 서울大學校商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1973 經濟論集 Vol.12 No.2

日帝末 韓國의 工業化에 관한 一考察

林鍾哲 서울大學校商科大學韓國經濟硏究所 1969 經濟論集 Vol.8 No.3

韓國의 經濟成長 雇傭 및 賃金

邊衡尹 서울大學校商科大學 韓國經濟硏究所 1967 經濟論集 Vol.6 No.3