독일의 제국주의 1897-1906

정상수(Sang Su Jung) 한국독일사학회 2002 독일연구 Vol.- No.3

Mit der wirtschaftlichen Interpretation des Marxismus und der sozialen Interpretation Hans-Ulrich Wehlers allein ist der deutsche Imperialismus vor 1914 nicht vollständig erklärt. Wolfgang J. Mommsen verweist auf die komplexen Elemente des deutschen Imperialismus. Zumindest bestand er aus drei verschiedenen Entwicklungsfaktoren. Es sind erstens der gouvernementale Imperialismus, der als “Weltpolitik” bezeichnet und von der Regierung und den Politikern zur Staatsräson erklärt wurde, zweitens der informelle ökonomische Imperialismus, der mit dem Bau der Bagdadbahn vertreten und von den privaten Banken und den Unternehmern, die den wirtschaftlichen Gewinn durch Handel und Investition im Ausland suchten, geleistet wurde, und drittens der radikale nationalistische Imperialismus, der durch die bürglichen Verbände, wie z. B. dem Alldeutschen Verband und dem Flottenverein, und durch das außenpolitische Interesse der öffentlichen Meinung vertreten wurde. Diese drei Faktoren des Imperialismus konnten miteinander in Kooperation und in Konflikt geraten. Die sogenannte “Gun-boat diplomacy” und die Staatsanleihe sind Beispiele für Kooperation zwischen den Faktoren, während zwischen dem gouvernementalen und dem ökonomischen Imperialismus Konflikte auftreten konnten. In der “Gun-boat diplomacy” unterstützte der gouvernementale den ökonomischen Imperialismus. Im Gegenzug unterstützten die privaten Banken den gouvernementalen Imperialismus durch Leistungen der Staatsanleihe, wodurch die Banken wirtschaftlich große Verluste in Kauf nahmen. Der in der öffentlichen Meinung gestellte Anspruch konnte auch der Außenpolitik der Regierung zum Nachteil werden. Wenn die Kooperation dem Konflikt überwog, konnte der Imperialismus schließlich gelingen. Die Steuerung der Konflikte zwischen den drei imperialistischen Faktoren sollte die Regierung übernehmen. Nach der Entlassung Bismarcks spielte die deutsche Regierung jedoch keine gute Rolle in der Kontrolle der öffentlichen Meinung, der Banken und der Unternehmer. Das ist die Ursache des Scheiterns des deutschen Imperialismus.

1차 세계대전의 동아시아에 대한 파급효과

정상수(Sangsu Jung) 한국서양사연구회 2013 서양사연구 Vol.0 No.49

In compliance with the Alliance with England since 1902 Japan entered into the First World War. But Japan is one of the European civil war and World War II, using the advance of China and the North Pacific region and in order to become a major power in East Asia was. Japan, using the civil war in Europe, the First World war, expand its influence in mainland China and the North Pacific region. Ultimately the Japanese wanted to become superpower in East Asia. The Japanese military attacked the German leased land Qingdao in Shandong and the Japanese navy drove the German East Asian Cruiser Squadron to the South Pacific region. After Qingdao fell to the Japanese, the Beijing government was required to accept the Twenty-One Demands in 1915. The problem is the Group V, in which dispatched advisers from Japan will interfere in the internal affairs of China. The United States had resisted the Twenty-One Demands. Through the mediation of England the Group V is reserved. But in the Washington Conference 1921/22 Japan was defeated diplomatically. During the First World War Germany could use the conflict between the United States and Japan in East Asia. But because Germany too believed its military force, it missed an opportunity, in which Germany cooperated with the United States.

구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아 동작교육이 자기조절능력과 자기효능감에 미치는 영향

정상수 ( Sang Soo Jung ),성소영 ( So Young Sung ) 미래유아교육학회 2011 미래유아교육학회지 Vol.18 No.4

본 연구는 구성주의교수법에 의한 유아동작교육이 유아의 자기조절능력과 자기효능감에 미치는 효과를 검증하는데 그 목적이 있다. 연구대상은 대구시의 두 유치원에 재원중인 만 6세 유아 80명으로 구성되었다. 실험집단과 통제집단은 각 40명씩 다른 유치원의 유아들로 구성하였다. 실험집단은 구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아동작교육프로그램을 15주간 15회 실시하였고, 비교집단은 전통적 유아체육교육프로그램을 실시하였다. 프로그램 실시 전후에 유아의 자기조절능력 검사는 체크리스트를 통해, 자기효능감 검사는 개별면접 방법으로 실시하여 기록·채점하였다. 구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아동작교육이 자기조절능력 및 자기효능감에 미치는 영향을 알아보기 위해 자료 분석에는 공분산분석(ANCOVA)을 사용하였다. 본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아동작교육은 자기조절능력(자기통제, 주의집중, 충동성감소)에서 주의집중을 제외한 모든 영역에서 긍정적인 효과가 나타났다. 둘째, 구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아동작교육은 자기효능감(인지적 자기효능감, 사회·정서적 자기효능감, 신체적 자기효능감)에서 긍정적인 효과가 나타났다. 따라서 구성주의 교수법에 의한 유아동작교육은 자기조절능력 및 자기효능감을 향상시키는 활동으로 활용 가능함을 시사한다. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of young children`s movement education based on constructivism on children`s self-control ability and self-efficacy. 80 6-year-old children in two kindergartens in Daegu were selected as the subject of this study. Each experimental and control group consists of 40 children from the two kindergarten. The experiment group carried out the young children`s movement education program based on constructivism teach method 15 times for 15 weeks, and the control group did young children`s physical education program based on traditional methods. Before and after operating this activities, children`s self-control test by checklists and self-efficacy test through individual interviews were done, and both tests were recorded and graded. ANCOVA was conducted for data analysis. The results of the study were as follows: First, young children`s movement education based on constructivism had positive effect on the self-control ability areas(self-control, paying concentrated attention, & reduction of impulsiveness) except for paying concentrated attention. Second, young children`s movement education based on constructivism had positive effect on self-efficacy(cognitive self-efficacy, social and mental self-efficacy, and physical self-efficacy). In conclusion, young children`s movement education based on constructivism can be used as an activity to improve self-control ability and self-efficacy.

부들러의 한국 중립론

정상수 ( Sangsu Jung ) 한국서양사연구회 2017 서양사연구 Vol.0 No.57

The former studies insisted that the grounds of Budler’s Korean Neutralism were prevention from military conflict between China and Japan, and exalitation of German dignity in Korea. But Budler judged that the war between China and Japan was likely to break out. In this circumstances he prepared a written advice for the Neutralism of Korea. Budler took the place of Mollendorff, who was absent in Seoul, and made the Korean Neutralism as an objective European adviser. Mollendorff established Belgium as example of Neutralism for Korea, but Budler proposed Swiss. Budler prepared the Korean Neutralism not for the German national interest, but for the Korean national security and development. Comparatively speaking Yu Kil-chun’s Korean Neutralism, which was made in December 1885, Budler’s Neutralism exert a big influence upon the politic in Korea. When the Russian-Japanese War broke out in 1904, Gojung declared the Neutrality of Korea, which was originated from Budler’s Neutralism. (ssjung15@hanmail.net)

경산지역 청동기시대 주거지와 묘지로 본 인구(人口)의 변화

정상수 ( Jung Sang-soo ),방선지 ( Bhang Sun-ji ) 경북대학교 영남문화연구원 2018 嶺南學 Vol. No.

경산지역 청동기시대 유적을 크게 6개의 군집으로 나누었으며, 주거지의 노지와 바닥 면적을 이용하여 각 시기별로 거주자 수를 추정하였다. 그 결과를 가지고 각 시대별 연평균 인구증가율과 1개 주거지를 1가구로 볼 때 각 시대별 가구 구성원수 그리고 묘지와 가구ㆍ인구를 비교하였다. 그 결과 경산지역에서 조기와 후기 등 문화가 변동될 때 인구수가 가장 작았으며, 묘지수는 1기이거나 없었다. 반면 전기와 중기 등 안정적인 시기에는 인구가 늘어났으며, 특히 현재까지 발굴조사 결과 중기에는 약 2,500명이 살았던 것으로 보인다. 1가구 구성원은 문화변동이 있던 시기(조기와 후기)는 높은 편이지만, 안정적인 시기(전기와 중기)는 낮은 편에 속한다. 안정적인 시기에도 가장 인구가 많았던 곳(중서군)은 가구구성원이 많은 편에 속하며, 종합하여 볼 때 가구를 중심으로 생활을 영위하였던 것으로 추정된다. 그렇지만 북서군은 안정적인 시기(중기)에 인구가 다른 곳보다 줄어들었으나 묘지는 늘어났다. 이는 인구증가율이 가장 낮은 것으로 보아 혼인이나 이주 등에 제약이 있었다고 판단된다. 주거지와 묘지를 통해 본 경산지역 청동기시대는 분절사회로 짐작된다. We do a classification the 6th-group at bronze age in Gyeongsan (慶山) area and the population of 4-period at bronze age calculate on the number of hearth and the dwelling floor space. We search the outcome for the population 4-period, the estimation of the annual rate of population growth, the number of households and compared the household and the population to the graveyard. The result of this method, the population is of a small size at the time of culture change-period such as the early and the late period on 1 graveyard or none. However the stable period - the former and the middle period - the population is on the increase and in particular the middle period it is the numerous of about 2,500 persons. In the number of households the early and the late period is the higher than the former and the middle period, anyway in the middle period the most much population's site is a higher. We estimate to live through the household. In case of the middle period at north-west group of population dwindle away into a smaller than the other sites but the group go on increasing in graveyard. The north-west group on the middle period show the estimation of the annual rate of population growth to the other group and it is control to marriage or migration.

독일 함대정책과 해외함대 1898~1901년

鄭尙秀(Jung Sang-Su) 歷史敎育硏究會 2007 역사교육 Vol.103 No.-

Critical historians insist that the purpose of German Naval Policy was an irrational attack against Britain as a foreign policy, and domestically to collect power against parliamentary democracy. And the latter was more important than diplomatic or military reasons considering the fact that the policy was established based on the theory of social historians, ‘Primat der Innenpolitik', to protest social and parliamentary democracy. However, foreign policy they pursued that time was a Weltpolitik which has its own originality. After intervening the post Sino-Japanese War as the Triple Intervention in 1895, they were ready for a take-off to be a world power, not only a great power in Europe, to hop here and there to intervene in dispute or trouble over the world. To realize this plan the naval policy to raise powerful naval forces was essential. After Tirpitz became the secretary of the Navy Department in 1897, there was a big controversy whether they should focus more on building cruisers than on ships-of-the-line or vice-versa. They dreaded the blockade of their home waters by British Navy, and hence accepted Tirpitz' policy that they had to concentrate on home fleet first, and later move on to overseas fleet. Social historian like Berghahn insisted that this was an offensive gesture against England. This was, however, rather a defensive one to prevent Britain from blockading home waters. In short, German Naval Policy has both defensive and offensive sides, but defence was preferred over offence. Final goal for their naval policy was to threaten British Navy, after they become strong enough not to worry about British Navy closing their near sea. Seizing the opportunity of the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, they dispatched a naval division made up of ships-of-the-line to Northeast Asia as a part of Weltpolitik. This harvested some fruit in October 1900, from the Yangtze Agreement with England. However, they decided to evacuate the division in Asia in 1901, because they still needed to defend their northern sea in case of dispute with England. This shows that German Weltpolitik was inconsistentand contradictory.

회색의 추기경각하

정상수(Jung Sang Su) 한국독일사학회 2005 독일연구 Vol.- No.9

Nach der Entlassung Bismarcks 1890 führte Fritz von Holstein die deutsche Außenpolitik. Er war Nachfolger Bismarcks. Der Schwerpunkt der deutschen Außenpolitik lag in der Rivalität zwischen England und Rußland. Im Jahr 1877 bezeichnet Bismarck von dem Kissinger Diktat diesen Schwerpunkt. Holstein auch benutzte den Gegensatz zwischen England und dem russisch-französischen Zweibund. Die Außenpolitik Holsteins bennante mann die Politik der freien Hand . Aber anders als Bismarck hatte Holstein pro-englische Tendenz. Er versuchte die Allianz zwischen Deutschland und England in 1898/1901. Weil der Reichskanzler Bülow die deutsch-englische Verhandlungen Holsteins verhinderte, beendete sie ohne Erfolg. Um die englische Weltherrschaft zu stören, hoffte Bülow den deutsch-russischen Kontinentalbund. Auf der Doppelkrise 1904/05 hatte Deutschland eine Chance, zur Weltmacht sich zu steigern. Aber zwischen England und Frankreich bestand die Entente cordiale in 1904, welche die französischen Herrschaft in Marokko erkannte. Um seine Politik der freien Hand, Holstein mußte die Entente cordiale zerschlagen. Um die Probleme über Marokko zu entscheiden, fand eine Konferenz der Großmächte in Algeciras/Spanien statt. In Algecras 1906 wurde Deutachland diplomatisch besiegt. Nach der Konferenz wurde Deutschland in der Mächtesystem isoliert. Algeciras war der Sieg der französischen Außenpolitik Delcasses. Aber Die wichtigste Ursache der diplomatischen Niederlage Deutschlands in Algeciras war die Spaltung der deutschen politischen Leitung zwischen Holstein, Bülow und Wilhelm II.

구 농지개혁법상 수분배권의 법적 성질 - 대법원 2021. 4. 8. 선고, 2020다219690 판결을 중심으로 -

정상수(Sang Soo Jung) 인하대학교 법학연구소 2023 法學硏究 Vol.26 No.3

비스마르크의 외교정책 1870 / 71 - 1878 / 79

정상수(Sang Su Jung) 한국서양사연구회 2000 서양사연구 Vol.26 No.-

N/A

비스마르크의 식민정책과 거문도 사건

정상수(Sangsu Jung) 한국서양사연구회 2012 서양사연구 Vol.0 No.46

If you view from the side of foreign private, Bismarck's colonial politic was not global policy which enhanced the german status and took economic benefits by acquiring colony and spheres of influence, but European policy which completely isolated France. It was Bismarck's diplomatic goals. In March 1884 Bismarck began the german colonial policy. It cooperated with France and broke the english 'Monroe Doctrine' in Africa. Through colonial policy Bismarck wanted to let England recognize the need for allies. In June 1885 the english Cabinet was changed from liberal to conservative. Salisbury, the new english premier minister, took the gesture of cooperation with Germany, and Bismarck stopped the colonial politic. Its case in point would be the showing Port Hamilton incident. If you view the Port Hamilton occupation of England from East Asian paradigm, relations between Korea and China is important. Because of the Port Hamilton incident the European powers studied the State-Identity of Korea until the ending of the Sino-Japanese War 1895, whether Korea was independent state or dependent state on China in foreign policy. If you view the Port Hamilton incident in the global system, you must observe the changes in the german foreign policy. Bismarck stopped his colonial policy, and turned to friendly atmosphere with England. By german acknowledgement of english Port Hamilton occupation he hoped that England would be merged into his alliance system. But because of the english public opinion against the Germany, Salisbury selected the 'splendid isolation' in the foreign policy.