상수도수 불소화 사업에 관한 조사 연구

한봉석,최유진 ( Bong Suk Han,Eu Gene Choi ) 대한예방치과·구강보건학회 1985 大韓口腔保健學會誌 Vol.9 No.1

일반논문 : 정조(貞操) 담론의 근대적 형성과 법제화 -1945년 이전 조일(朝日) 양국의 비교를 중심으로-

한봉석 ( Bong Seok Han ) 성균관대학교 인문학연구원(성균관대학교 인문과학연구소) 2014 人文科學 Vol.0 No.55

오늘날 우리가 사용하는 ‘정조(貞操)’라는 말은 보통 전통으로 간주되지만 실은 역사적 문화적 맥락에서 재구성된 새로운 기호 체계이다. 역사적으로 고대 중국 이래 『열녀전』 등을 통해 형성된 정절 담론은 중국 명청 시대 이래 동아시아 사회로 확산되었다. 조선은 국가수립 후 성리학적국가의 운영의 상징으로 삼강을 선택했고, 정절은 그 중요한 구성요소였다. 식민지 시기에 이르러 정조 담론은 서구와 일본의 영향을 받아 재구성되었다. 먼저 메이지 시기 전후 일본에서 정조는 중국과 조선에서 사용되던 정절과 같은 의미로 사용되었다. 그러나 1910년대를 거치면서 수신교육과 성욕학, 그리고 일부일처제의 논리, 자유연애담론과의 결합 속에가정 내에 위치하게 되었다. 이제 정조담론은 처녀 대 ‘매소부(賣笑婦)’의 구도를 구분하는 기준점이 되는 것은 물론 일부일처제 하 양처현모의 중요한 담론으로 기능하게 되었다. 한편으로 식민지 조선에서는 종래 정절 담론의 관습이었던 재가금지와 내외 위에 일본으로부터 유입된 자유연애, 일부일처제, 성욕학, 수신교육등의 영향을 받아 정조 담론의 재구성을 보게 되었다. 1930년대에 이르면 식민지 조선에서의 정조 담론은 일본으로부터 도입했던 정조담론과 정절의 내용들을 결합한 형태의 담론이 되었다. 한편으로 이렇게 형성된 정조담론은 민법과 형법의 보호법익의 대상이 되면서 추상적인 담론 수준을 벗어나 법리적으로 그 구체성을 확보하게 되었다. 민법상 정조라는 것은권리이자 의무로 기능했고, 호주제를 유지하는 중요한 기둥으로 작동했다. 또한 형법상 정조는 간통, 강간, 간음의 중요한 죄와 함께 기능했다. 이 과정에서 정조는 그 보호법익으로서 여성이라는 주체의 인격권을 보호하기 보다는 여성주체의 신체일부에 과도하게 밀착하는 모습을 보였다. 그리고 이렇게 담론적 법적으로 재구성된 정조담론은 해방이후 1953년 신형법의 ‘정조에 관한 죄’로 이어지면서 해방 이후 정조담론으로 그 역사성을 이어가게 되었다. Even though the term “chastity” that we use today is usually accepted as a tradition-bound word, it is a new sign system that has been reproduced from the historical and cultural perspective. Since the ancient times of China, the discourses of “chastity” had been established through various channels including the publication of Biographies of Exemplary Women (列女傳) and were later spread to East Asia in general after the Ming and Qing dynasty. Right after its foundation, the Joseon dynasty chose the three cardinal principles in human relations (三綱; or the three bonds) as the symbol of state management under the principle of Neo-Confucianism as state ideology. “Chastity” was a major element of the three cardinal principles. During the Japanese colonial period, the discourses of “chastity” were reorganized through the influence of the West and Japan. First of all, the term “chastity” was used in Japan during the Meiji Restoration (明治維新, Meiji Ishin) period in the same meaning as used in China and Joseon. In the 1910s, however, the term was confined to the space of “home” amidst a mixture of a variety of concepts such as cultivation of mind and body, the study of sexual desires, the idea of monogamy, and the discourses of free love. Thus, the discourses of “chastity” not only became the criterion of judgment in the “virgin vs. harlot” frame but also functioned as the major discourses of “good wife and wise mother” under the system of monogamy. Meanwhile, the colonized Joseon has to witness the reorganization of the “chastity” discourses because its time-honored discourses of “chastity” - prohibition of remarriage - was influenced by free love, monogamy, the study of sexual desires, cultivation of mind and body imported from Japan. In the 1930s, the discourses of “chastity” in the colonized Joseon developed into the discourses that combined the discourses of “chastity” and the ideas of fidelity imported from Japan. Meanwhile, the newly formed discourses of “chastity” became the object of the benefit and protection in both civil and criminal laws, thereby acquiring its concrete qualities free from the abstract discourses. In terms of civil law, “chastity” functioned as both the right and the duty of citizens and as a major pillar of maintaining the patriarchal family system. In terms of criminal law, losing one’s “chastity” functioned as a major crime along with extramarital relations, rape, and adultery. In the process, “chastity” was inclined to stick to the part of the female subject’s body rather than helping protect the personality of the female subject who could receive the benefit and protection of the law. Besides, such discourses of “chastity” that had been legalized in terms of discourses was concerned with a crime related to “chastity” in the new criminal law in 1953 after Korea’s liberation from Japan. It continued to retain its historicity as the discourses of “chastity” after Korea’s liberation.

미국 대한 원조와 윌리엄 원

한봉석(HAN BONG SEOK) 역사비평사 2018 역사비평 Vol.- No.125

There were such groups, ‘U.S. Practical Modernists’ in the OEC during 1950’s. No one had focused on such groups except a few studies. They have three points to different from others. First, people with business experience formed in South America in the 1940s. Secondly members of the Moral Law College in the United States, the United Nations and the Foundation, and lastly, they entered the U.S. diplomatic arena. Then, the practice of U.S. Korean aid in the 1950s took the form of two fields; technical cooperation and rehabilitation engineer service. Among them, technical cooperation has become a channel for these working-level modernists to be invested in Korean aid. They put ‘Low level modernization’, which puts priority on supporting health, sanitation, education, and agriculture, not industrial development. In conclusion, the U.S. Korean aid policy in the 1950s was not an appropriate form of development aid for the underdeveloped country. It would still be said that the postwar restoration was strong despite the slogans, “from relief to rehabilitation” in 1957.

쎄타핀치장치의 crowbar실험에 관한 연구

한봉석(Han Bongseok),장용무(Chang Yongmoo),정운관(Chung Woonkwan),강형부(Kang Hyungboo) 대한전기학회 1987 대한전기학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.1987 No.11

장면 정권의 “혼란”에 대한 미국의 책임 -유솜과 제1대 유솜처장 레이몬드 모이어의 역할을 중심으로-

한봉석 ( Han Bong Seok ) 연세사학연구회( 구 연세대학교 사학연구회 ) 2021 學林 Vol.47 No.-

1960년대 초 장면정권은 주로 ‘혼란상’으로 기억된다. 하지만 역사적으로 ‘혼란’은 만들어진 것이다. 장면 정권의 혼란상을 평가하는데 있어 두 가지 요소를 살펴봐야 한다. 첫째는 1950년대 말 명칭을 변경한 usom의 역할, 두 번째는 제1대 유솜처장 레이몬드 모이어(Raymond Moyer)의 역할이다. 먼저 1950년대 말 유솜은 새롭게 출범한 것이 아니다. 유솜은 기존 미국 대한원조의 기술협조의 흐름위에 위치한다. 즉 전기 주한경제조정관실이 곧 유솜으로 명칭 변경을 한 것이 우선시되어야 한다. 다만 미국은 이를 통해 한국에서 원조의 ‘정상화’, 곧 country team 체제를 복원할 수 있었다. 그러나 미국 대한원조의 실행 구조, 경제정책 수립에 있어서 유솜의 역할에 주의할 필요가 있다. 따라서 팔리 보고서는 유솜을 공격했다기 보다, 1950년대 미국 대한원조를 공격한 것이다. 그리고 이를 익히 알고 있던 워싱턴의 관리들이 이를 새로운 원조정책 수립을 위해 활용했다. 이것은 만들어진 혼란이다. 둘째, 레이몬드 모이어가 혼란을 조장한 측면이 있다. 레이몬드 모이어는 20세기 초 아시아에 정착한 이래, 오랫동안 미국 동아시아 정책 사업에 참여한 아시아통이었다. 다만 그는 아시아 중에서 대만에 큰 관심을 보였을 뿐, 한국에 대해서는 별 관심이 없었다. 그는 한국에 개발이 아닌 구호가 여전히 필요하다고 보았다. 하지만 그의 이런 시각과 자세는 딜론 각서 하에 신음하던 한국정부에 내부적 불안요소가 되었다. 결론적으로 1960년대 초 장면정권을 상징하는 혼란에서 미국 요소를 잘 분해해서 이해할 필요가 있다. 그 중 첫 번째 요소는 만들어진 것이며, 두 번째 요소는 실제하는 것이었다. 그러나 미국이 한국을 불안하게 봤던 그 시선은 곧 한국정부의 존립에 불안한 요소가 되었다 할 것이다. 미국 대한원조에서 미국인에 주목할 이유가 여기 있다 할 것이다. In the early 1960s, the Jang Myeon regime was characterized by confusion. However, it is important to examine the two factors that led to this regime’s chaos: the role of USOM, which changed its name in the late 1950s, and Raymond Moyer, the first chief of USOM. USOM was not founded in the late 1950s. The Office of the Economic Coordinator changed its name to the United States Operations Mission to the Republic of Korea and so became USOM. However, the US was able to normalize aid to South Korea. However, it is necessary to examine the role that USOM played in the implementation of US aid and economic policies. The Farley report did not attack USOM specifically but rather US aid to South Korea in the 1950s generally. US government officials used the attack to create new aid policies. This move created confusion. Moyer himself also created confusion. Moyer had been a long-time East Asian policymaker in the United States since he had lived in Asia in the early 20th century. However, his specific interest was in Taiwan and not in South Korea. He believed that South Korea still needed, not development. However, his perspectives and attitudes became a source of anxiety for the South Korean government which was concerned by the Dillon memorandum. It is necessary to identify and understand the two major US contributions to the chaos of the regime in the early 1960s. The first element was created while the second was a real person. However, the US view of South Korea as unstable soon contributed to the South Korean government’s instability. This is the reason why the US aid to South Korea.

1950년대 미국 대한 기술원조의 역사적 한 맥락

한봉석(Han, Bong-seok) 한국인물사연구회 2015 한국인물사연구 Vol.23 No.-

William E. Warne, the Former OEC Korea Coordinator, born in Indiana Seafield of the U.S. in 1905. It might be not so familiar for someone who doesn"t interest in the Korean Modern Economy. but if you want to know the real situation during 1950"s Korea, You suppose to be aware of him. He was not a single men who had just visited the Korea, but a symbol of the U.S. foreign aid during 1950"s.; Especially, technical assistance, self-help, humanitarianism. We can see the details as follows. First, William E. warne was familiar with the concept what the technical assistance was. Technical assistance has been misunderstood in modern Korean scholar fields. Sometimes it had considered as "technical part". But it contains everything which can support the Capitalism focusing on the U.S. World market. This terms had originated since Point Four Program in 1949. William E. Warne was a "Dreamer" of the Project in Truman Regime. Then, "Self-Help" concept has been a hot issue in the study of the U.S. Foreign Aid in R.O.K. But we can see the history of the term, Self-Help, where it came from. It had originated from the project of the U.S. in Latin America during WW2. The U.S. Government didn"t want to aid big money to underdeveloped countries unlike Marshall Plan in West Europe. So they had made the concept like "Self-Help". William E. Warne used to comment this concept during his job at underdeveloped countries. Finally, We can understand why so many U.S. Government Officials had such a wired job out of the U.S. Point Four Program, William E. Warn had joined, had such concepts like humanitarianism. It might be not the perfect explanation, but it suggests some clue. We can see the detail by trace William E. Warne"s Life. In conclusion, William E. Warne was the secondly coordinator of the O.E.C. during late 1950"s in R.O.K. He had passed by the road which contains U.S. Foreign Aid to underdeveloped countries. We can get the scene what and why the U.S. officials did work in underdeveloped countries by tracing his past. That"s why we focus on the life of William E. warne. So we can see what the aid was and why did the officials of the U.S. Came to the R.O.K.

1970년대 주한 케아(C .A .R .E .)의 ‘종합급식계몽교육사업’ 연구 - 저개발국 여성의 몸에 기입된 냉전과 젠더, 그리고 과학

韓奉錫(HAN Bong-seok) 한국근현대사학회 2021 한국 근현대사 연구 Vol.99 No.-

The ‘Integrated Meal and Education Program’ was that to solve two main problems - educating how to birth control, and supporting meal to the children in undernutrition – of ROK in 1970s. The WFP, and Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, and the C.A.R.E.-Korea had started this program. This program represents cold war policy, racism, and gender discriminations. First, The program based on the nutrition science. The nutrition study had helped the US could release their responsibility from the development of the third world. Academic findings that children s malnutrition is related to the underdevelopment of the country helped this process. Then, hunger and malnutrition prevalent in underdeveloped countries were not due to the Cold War, but to their lack of capacity. As a result, nutrition, although unintended, included the remnants of racism in its gaze. More importantly, The Korean program shows that women from underdeveloped countries were used as a particularly leading tool in this program. In conclusions, the program was successful in the meals of daycare center children. This is the humanitarian aspect of this project. However, the various factors reflected in the project are the disadvantages of this project. In particular, there is more room for criticism that prejudice against underdeveloped countries, the Cold War, and science used women as tools. 1960년대 미국은 저개발국 개발을 표방하였으나, 점차 이전시기와 같은 규모의 원조를 지속하는데 부담을 느끼고 있었다. 그 결과 1960~ 70년대 이후개발, 인도주의, 분배 등의 목표가 미국 대외원조에 등장하였다. 이 과정에서과학, 개발, 젠더가 냉전정책의 변화를 합리화하는데 동원되었다. 1970년대 주한 케아가 세계식량계획, 한국보건사회부와 함께 진행했던 ‘종합급식계몽교육사업’은 그 대표적 사례 중 하나라고 할 수 있다. 주한 케아는 1969년 미 국제개발처의 ‘기아와의 전쟁국’ 장려금 사업을 바탕으로 1973년 종합급식계몽교육사업을 시작하였다. 1978년 중반 주한 케아의역할은 한국 단체로 이전되었다. 이 사업은 형식상 한국 어린이들에 대한 급식사업을 지원했지만, 실질적으로는 모성에 대한 영양 및 산아제한 교육을 목표로했다. 이 과정에서 저개발국 개발의 실패를 당사자에게 전가하고자 하는 미국의외교적 논리, 저개발국 당사자에게 죄책감을 소환하는 데 영양학이 동원되었다. 여기에는 인종주의적 편견도 함께 동원되었다. 저개발국 여성, 즉 한국 여성들은 이 사업의 핵심적 수원자이자 행위자였다. 그러나 냉전에 반영된 ‘젠더차별’ 은 냉전의 논리를 수원국의 언어로 번역하고, 그 최종 책임을 미국이 아닌 수원국, 나아가 수행자인 여성으로 돌리는 데 큰 역할을 하였다. 결과적으로 1970년대 주한 케아의 사업은 인도주의라는 냉전전략변경과 문화변용의 과정을 함께보여주는 사례라 할 것이다.

퀴어와 페미니즘, 그 “험한 세상의 다리가 되어”(한양대학교 비교역사문화연구소 젠더연구팀 기획/홍양희 엮음, 『`성聖/性`스러운 국민 - 젠더와 섹슈얼리티를 둘러싼 근대 국가의 법과 과학』, 서해문집, 2017)

한봉석 ( Han Bong-seok ) 한국여성사학회 2017 여성과 역사 Vol.0 No.26

Today, We finally see the scene which Feminism Issue has occupied every single word in the World. But there are some problems. One of struggles is `TERF` issue. This book suggest such a struggle in several reasons; This book has treated issues such as Masculinity and Femininity. This book consists of two main parts. First part has 3 main Topics. First Part taking the Femininity Issues as follows 1. For the Sake of “Good Morals”: The Adultery and the Control of Sexuality in Colonial Korea 2. “Woman Free from Habitual Debauchery?”: Criminal Law, Post-coloniality, and Women`s Sexuality 3. The Democratic Issues of Family Law and Nationalization of Women in Postcolonial Korea -Focused on `the Capable Person System of Wives`- These three studies subscribed how the modern government relocate the sex/gender since 1910`s. Especially they have focused `Cisgender` Woman. Then, 4 topics tried to describe the how the government could make the people of the Korean Modern Nations. The details are as follows 1. The Contact zone of queer field and Legal regulation in 1950`s South Korea 2.“Right” to Die for Nation: The Military Service Law and the Making of “Holy Citizen”(1927-1971) 3. “National” Borders of the Postcolonial State: With a special focus on the legal status of the families of Japanese-Korean intermarriages 4. The Rupture between Paternal Jus Sanguinis and “Sound” Citizens : The Ban on Same-Surname-Same-Origin Marriage and its Reality in South Korea during the 1950s-1970s These studies has concluded that the modern korea has tried to make their own people of the Nation. The main method were making pure male citizens by exclude the others; woman,minority, and so forth. But the writers insists that it has failed. The Final Topic is the stem cell issues. this study concluded whole the studies in this books by follow papers. 1. Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Gender -egg donation, and women`s labor and participation- In conclusion, this book has studied the road of making Masculinity and Femininity since 1910`s. They insist that the making male blooded people plan has failed. It`s the time to think about the Feminism by Intersectionality.

냉전 초 미국의 포인트 포 사업과 ‘낮은 수준의 근대화(Low Modernization)’ ― 1950년대 이란(Iran)의 사례를 중심으로 ―

한봉석 ( Han Bong-seok ) 수선사학회 2018 史林 Vol.0 No.63

The Point Ⅳ Program in Iran shows a typical type of the ‘Technical Cooperation’ of the U.S. foreign aid. In other words, Technical Cooperation means ‘low modernization’ in a context of the U.S foreign aid. It has three components; land grant college, U.N. and the Charity Foundation, and Agricultural Programs. First of all, The land grant college was originated from Project of the Department of Agriculture. The < Morrill Land Grant College Act > had proclaimed in 1862. This law had supported each state to establish the college by free. Then the < Hatch Law,1887 >, < Smith-Lever Act,1914 > made public. It made improvement in Agricultural area. And these college provide agricultural extension program to the people. In 1950’s early, Utah state Agricultural College, Brigham Young University, University of Utah, Syracuse University, University of Southern California joined the Point Ⅳ Program in Iran. They made a elemental education for the Iran child. That was a first clue of low modernization. Then, U.N. also joined the Point Ⅳ Program in Iran. For exemple, we can see the UNEPTA (United Nations Expanded Program of Technical Assistance). U.N. had a their own technical cooperation projects. The ECOSOC(Economic and Social Council), Technical Assistance Committee, Technical Assistance Board (TAB) had a power to rule of such projects. The most popular case in Iran project were establishing milk pasteurization plant, vocational training by UNESCO. This was a second part of ‘low modernization’ Finally, the last part of ‘low modernization’ were a Agricultural part of Iran. The U.S. had accused the Agricultural problems in Iran as three parts such as agriculture, land distribution, agrarian development. For instance, the rural community development has such three parts of them. In fact, Agrarian Development Program which Shah had strongly supported had failed because of the traditional landowners felt uncomfortable and religious leader neither did. Nevertheless, this was a last component of low modernization. In conclusion. ‘Low Modernization’ had three components; land grant college, U.N. and Charity Foundation, Agricultural Programs. Unfortunately, It had failed. But the Form of the low modernization had passed to the East Asia by Technical Cooperation of Point Ⅳ Program.

2차 세계대전 후 동아시아지역 미국 경제협조처사업의 성격 -중국본토 및 타이완의 농촌부흥연합회 사례를 중심으로

한봉석 ( Han Bong Seok ) 아시아문화학술원 2018 인문사회 21 Vol.9 No.3

1950년대 미국의 동아시아 정책은 주로 ‘개발’ 담론 중심으로 독해되었다. 기존 연구들은 미국의 유럽부흥계획의 핵심이었던 마샬플랜이 ECA 원조를 통해 동아시아에 그대로 적용되었음에 주목한다. 본고에서는 비교사의 관점에서 당대 중국본토, 타이완에서의 농촌부흥연합회 사업을 통해 기존의 역사상이 지나치게 개발 담론 중심이었음을 지적하고자 한다. 결론적으로 아시아 지역에서 미국의 ECA 사업은 미국의 저개발국 지원사업이었던 포인트 포 사업 등에서 많이 다루던 ‘농촌 지원’의 영역을 다수 포함하였다. 그 대표적 사례가 중국본토와 타이완에서의 중국농촌부흥연합회(JCRR) 사업이었다. 미 원조 당국은 중국 본토 및 타이완 지역에서의 사업을 통해 아시아에서 토지개혁의 중요성을 절감하였다. 하지만 기존 저개발국 농촌지도 방식이었던 ‘농촌기술지도’의 방침을 변경하지는 않았다. 결과적으로 미국의 ECA사업의 아시아적 전유과정에서 ‘생산성 개선’의 내용은 변화를 겪었다. 이는 1950년대 미국의 동아시아 원조, 대한원조를 다시 읽어내야 할 필요성을 제기한다. 특히 비슷한 위치에 있는 타이완과 한국 등의 원조에 대한 보다 세분화된 접근, 개발 담론 이외의 요소들을 통한 원조의 재독해가 향후 과제로서 제기된다 할 것이다. In the 1950s, US policy toward East Asia was mainly focused on ‘development’ discourse. Existing studies note that the US Marshall Plan for Europe has been applied to East Asia through ECA assistance. In this study, I would like to point out that the history of the Rural Revival Association in the mainland of China and Taiwan was an overdeveloped discourse center from the perspective of comparative history. In conclusion, in the Asian region, the US ECA project included many areas of ‘rural support’, which was dealt with in the point of business, which was the US’s underdeveloped country support project. A representative example was the China Rural Revival Association (JCRR) project in mainland China and Taiwan. US aid agencies have reduced the importance of farmland reform in Asia through business in mainland China and Taiwan. However, it did not change the policy of ‘rural technology guidance’ which was a method of rural development in the developed countries. As a result, the content of “productivity improvement” has changed in the Asian appropriation process of the US ECA business. This raises the need to read America’s aid to East Asia and Korea in the 1950s. In particular, a more detailed approach to aid in Taiwan and South Korea, which are in similar positions, and the re-reading of aid through factors other than developmental discourse will be raised as future tasks.