중등 “역사”ㆍ고등 “한국사” 교과서 국정화에 대한 반론

서인원(Seo, In-won) 역사실학회 2015 역사와실학 Vol.58 No.-

2015년 11월 3일, 박근혜 정부가 중등 역사와 고등 한국사 교과서 국정화를 확정고시하였다. 2015년 10월 12일, 황우여 사회부총리 겸 교육부 장관은 중학교 “역사”와 고등학교 “한국사” 교과서를 국정으로 발행하는 내용의 "중ㆍ고등학교 교과용도서 국ㆍ검ㆍ인정 구분(안)"을 행정 예고하였으며, 11월 5일의 확정 고시 기일을 기다리지도 않고 2일이나 빨리 발표한 것이다. 진보ㆍ보수 이념과는 상관없이 여론은 반대쪽으로 확연히 기울어졌지만, ‘청소년들을 위해서’라는 명분을 내세워 국정화를 단행하였다. 교육부가 현행 고등 한국사 교과서에서도 충분히 구현되고 있는 내용들을 ‘사실 오류ㆍ편향성 수정’, ‘다양성의 확보’, ‘질 관리 체계 구축’, ‘헌법 가치 수호’ 등의 왜곡되고 편향적인 방향으로 몰고 가고 있는 것이다. 역사는 결코 하나의 시각으로만 기술할 수는 없다. 붕당 정치로 정쟁이 무척 심했던 조선 시대의 〈조선왕조실록〉 저술 과정을 보아도 알 수 있다. 남인이 작성한 〈현종실록〉을 마땅치 않게 생각한 서인은 경신환국으로 다시 권력을 잡고 〈현종개수실록〉을 썼다. 그러나 정쟁이 심했던 이 시기에도 서인들은 후대가 참고하고 판단하라고 원래의 〈현종실록〉은 파기하지 않았다. 결국 “역사”와 “한국사” 교과서 국정화는 학문적 차원의 문제가 아니라, 정치공학적인 차원에서 결정된 잘못된 사례이다. 비록 현재에는 역사교과서의 국정화가 실시되고는 있지만, 앞으로의 역사교육은 다양한 가치관과 창의력이 개발되는 방향으로 전환될 것임을 믿어 의심하지 않는다. November 3, 2015, Park Geun-hye government confirmed government-designated textbook system, which is for middle and high school education. It was 2 days earlier than the official day which was clearly stated on the previous notice of Oct 12, which was issued by Woo-yeo Hwang, the minister of education. Although the major public opinion was opposed to the new government-designated textbook. regardless of political stance, it has been enforced ‘for the sake of our students.’ The mistry of education is arguing that current textbooks are biased, proposing ‘modification of factual errors and bias’, ‘more diversity’, ‘establishing quality management system’, ‘conservation of constitutional values’, etc. History cannot be recorded by only one view, which seems obvious if you look through the process that “Choseon Wangjo Sillok” was written. Since Seo-in(one of parties in Choseon politic) was not in favor of the way “Hyeon-jong silok” written by Nam-in, the opposite party, they rewrite “Hyeon-jong gae-su silok” after they took the power back through Gyeong-sin Hwan-guk. However, Those days when political power game was far more severe, than these days, Seo-in didn’ t abandon “Hyeon-jong silok,” the original record. After all, government-designated textbook system debate is not the academic issue, Rather, it’s quite the problem of political manipulation. Despite the fact that government-designated textbook system is confirmed to be implemented, there’s no need to doubt that further history education have to be changed to the way diverse values and creativities can be developed.

역사 교과서 검정발행제 분석

서인원(Seo In-Won) 역사실학회 2007 역사와실학 Vol.32 No.-

Basically, It is considered that free publication system of textbook is the principle of issuing Korean History textbook, and the system should be pursued continuously. Therefore, it can be said that the publication system for authorized book is need as a transition stage because there needs adjusted point of view between social class members in order to move from the authorized publication system to free publication system. Making textbooks is a matter of deciding our nation's future. Especially, Korean History and Korean Modem Contemporary History are the our past and the present. We have duty to hand over the text book's contents which is described deliberately to our descent and to make them keep right historical view. I believe that in making the greatest history textbook system doesn't matter. I claim that it should be the awareness of the textbook writers that really matters, whether the books are nation-make or authorized. A nation should abandon its control or interruption over textbook making process, academic circles should give up adherence to their achievement, too. Teachers should study the textbook which is considered to be the most excellent, and should reflect on history education. This time should be a chance to improve textbook making process. To be a chance to make a most excellent textbook, government, academic circles and teachers should cooperate tightly.

경로의존성으로부터의 탈피(脫皮)

서인원(Inwon Seo) 한국비교사법학회 2023 비교사법 Vol.30 No.3

사헌(史軒) 임영정(林英正) 교수 정년 기념논총 : 논문 ; 국사 교육 평가의 현황 분석 - 대학수학능력시험의 고려시대 국사 문항을 중심으로 -

서인원 ( In Won Seo ) 동국사학회 2004 동국사학 Vol.40 No.-

국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN협약 상 이행기 전 계약위반 법리에 관한 연구

서인원(Seo, In Won) 서강대학교 법학연구소 2017 법과기업연구 Vol.7 No.1

비엔나협약 상의 ‘이행기 전 계약위반 법리’는, 계약체결 후 이행기까지를 공백상태로 인식해온 대륙법계 국가에는 매우 낯선 입법이다. 더불어 비엔나협약 성안당시 광범위한 지지를 보냈던 제 3세계 국가들의 맹렬한 반대에 부딪힌 입법이기도 하다. 이들에게 본 법리는, 시장의 주도권을 가진 계약당사자가 계약을 해체하고자 한다면, 언제든 사용할 수 있는 구밀복검(口蜜腹劍)에 다름 아니었던 것이다. 하지만 이들의 선입견과는 달리, 본 법리는 ‘이행거절의 명백한 의사표시’가 있거나 혹은 ‘이에 준’하는 경우, 계약해제를 기초로 발생한 손해를 전보하고, 계약당사자 쌍방이 신속히 시장으로 복귀할 수 있도록 돕는 입법이라 하겠다. 본 법리는, 19세기 영국의 Hochster v. De la Tour 사건, 미국의 Dingley v. Oler 사건에서 처음 논의되었다. 20세기 초까지 판례법에 의한 법리발전을 거듭하던 양국은, 1932년 제 1차 리스테이트먼트가 편찬되면서 각자 다른 진화과정을 겪게 된다. 영국은 판례법 발전에 기댄 채 성문화과정을 거치지 않은 반면, 미국은 연성법 형식의 성문화 과정을 거듭하게 된 것이다. 제정/제 1차 수정 통일상법전 제 2편(1952/1958), 제 2차 리스테이트먼트(1981), 제 2차 수정 통일상법전 제 2편(2002)이 바로 그 증거다. 이에 본 논고는, 상기한 입법의 제도사적·비교법적 논의를 진행함으로써, 본 법리가 시대적 흐름에 따라 개념의 점증과정을 거치고 있음을 발견하게 된다. 더불어 본 논고는, 1980년 채택된 비엔나협약이 이러한 진화적 일관성의 예외임을 분석하게 된다. 특히 비엔나협약 상의 이행기 전 계약위반은, 법률요건 차원에서는 19세기 영국판례의 정도, 법률효과 차원에서는 제정/제 1차 수정 통일상법전 제 2편의 정도에 달하는 진화가 있었음을 도출하게 된다. 이러한 입법적 ‘뒤틀림’에 대해 본 논고는, “첫 번째로, (법률요건 차원에서)명백한 이행거절 의사표시에 준하는 경우가 무엇인지 한정·열거하고, 계약위반당사자의 ‘철회권’을 명문화하는 한편, 비엔나 협약 제 72조 제 2항의 삭제”를 주장하고 있으며, “두 번째로, (법률효과 차원에서)인과관계 존부에 따른 손해배상 면책·제한규정을 도입하는 한편, 제 71조 제 3항에 ‘상거래 관행’을 명문화”하도록 요구하고 있다. 더불어 본 논고는, 이러한 법리의 현대화가 국제상사계약의 현실서, 과수요-저수요의 파동 폭을 줄여, 당사자 간의 거래비용을 효과적으로 감소시킬 것이라 분석하고 있다. 마지막으로 본 논고는, 이행기 전 계약위반의 법리를 역사적 제도주의 관점으로 재 해설(再 解說)한 본 논고의 분석틀이, 제도의 과학적 진화를 촉진시키는 데 도움이 될 것이라 주장하고 있다. The legal principle of anticipatory breach specified in GISG is highly unfamiliar to countries based on civil law that have recognized the time between conclusion and performance of a contract as being blank. In addition, this legislation met with fierce opposition from third world countries that showed extensive support for the draft of CISG; because, to them, it meant the contractor that has dominance in the market can arbitrarily use the provision to cancel the contract. However, contrary to their belief, this principle is intended to enable canceling a contract, upon express intention or equivalent notice prior to the period of performance, and transferring incurred damages so that both parties of the contract can promptly return to the market. This principle of law was first discussed during the Hochester v. De La Tour in England and Dingley v. Oler during the 19th century. The two countries, which used to develop principles of law based on case law until the early 20th century, began to walk different paths in the evolution of law, after compilation of the first Restatement in 1932. While England did not undergo codification based on common law, and, instead relied on development of case law, the US pursued codification in the form of soft law, as exemplified by the first/amended Uniform Commercial Code Second Edition (1952/1958), Restatement Second (1981), and second amended Uniform Commercial Code Second Edition (2002) This article disused the aforementioned law based on history of institutionalism and comparison and suggested that the concept of this law has steadily increased through the passage of time. In addition, this study analyzed CISG adopted in 1980 and showed that it is an exception to such evolutionary consistency. Particularly, according to findings in this article, anticipatory breach specified in CISG has seen evolution that corresponds to precedents in England during the 19th century in terms of legal conditions, and to the second edition of the enacted/first amended Uniform Commercial Code in terms of legal effect. Regarding such legislative contradiction this article, first, defined and listed cases that correspond to express intention of anticipatory breach from the viewpoint of legal conditions, and proposed deletion of Article 72.2 of CISG while introducing cooling-off. Second, it suggested introducing a provision of damage exemption based on existence of causality, from the viewpoint of legal effect, and addition of legislation related to lex mercatoria to Article 71.3. Lastly, this article proposed that the framework it used for analyzing the legal principle of anticipatory breach based on historical institutionalism can help promote scientific evolution of institution.

일본 홋카이도 아사지노비행장 건설 조선인 강제동원 실태에 대한 고찰

서인원(Seo, In-Won) 한일관계사학회 2020 한일관계사연구 Vol.69 No.-

1942년에서 1944년 사이 일본 홋카이도 아사지노지역의 육군 비행장건설에 강제 동원되어 사망한 조선인들에 대한 진상규명을 하기 위해 「아사지노신증사(信證寺)과거장」, 「사루후쓰무라 매 · 화장허가기록」, 「하마톤베쓰쵸 매 · 화장허가기록」, 「홋카이도개척순난자조사보고서(1991)」등에서 아사지노비행장 건설 사망자 명부와 피해 신고서를 비교 분석하여 사망자피해 실태를 파악하고 사망자의 사망원인, 노동환경에 대해 분석하여 강제동원 및 인권유린 실태에 대해 분석하였다. 명부, 사료, 다코베야 수용시설 등을 종합하면 조선인은 아사지노비행장에서 1,000~1,200명 정도 거주했을 것이고 사망자는 300~400명으로 추정할 수 있다. 현재 남아있는 명부인 「강제연행기 홋카이도 조선인 사망자명부」, 「아사지노 신증사(信證寺)과거장」, 「홋카이도개척순난자조사보고서」,「하마톤베쓰쵸 매화장인허증」을 정리하여 99명 정도의 조선인 사망자 명단을 확보할 수 있었다. 명부를 분석하면 건설업체 책임자가 학대와 폭행치사 등의 사망 사실을 은폐하기 위해 매화장인허증을 작성했을 때 사인을 허위로 작성하는 경우가 많았다. 丹野組는 사망자의 현주소가 존재하지 않은 비행장 관계 함바로 기입을 하고 허위 사망원인을 적은 매화장인허증을 하마톤베쓰쵸에 제출한 것도 있었다. 허위 매화장인허증은 사루후쓰무라에서 받아주기 않기 때문에 하마톤베쓰쵸에 사무실이 있는 것처럼 꾸며 사망신고서를 해당 관공서에 제출한 것이다. 또한 도망간 조선인을 잡아 구타로 사망하게 해놓고 매화장인허증 사인에는 정신이상, 변사 등으로 기재하고 있다. 이것은 홋카이도신문, 관련 사료, 증언 등의 분석을 통해 조선인이 구타에 의해 사망했다는 것을 입증할 수 있었다. 노동환경면에서 강제 동원된 조선인은 가혹한 중노동으로 영양실조가 되거나 장티푸스, 설사 등이 계속되어 치료도 받지 못하고 공사 현장에서 사망하는 경우도 많았다. 조선인 사망자 59%가 공사 현장인 아사지노비행장 대지와 현장막사에서 사망한 것은 과로사를 입증해주는 데이터이다. 이런 사망 원인은 가혹한 중노동, 인권유린, 감금, 폭행치사, 도주 감시 등 혹독한 노동환경에서 왔다. 일본 홋카이도 아사지노지역 사망자 현황과 피해 증언의 의하면 강제동원 조선인 사망자들은 대부분 강제 동원되었고 면서기, 일본경찰, 헌병, 행정직원들에 의해 조직적으로 강제 동원되었고 가혹한 노동과 열악한 노동환경에서 희생되었다는 것이 증명된다. We were analyzed in the list of victims, Certification for Burial and Cremation in order to clarify the facts about the Koreans who were forced to build an army airfield at Asajino in Hokkaido, Japan from 1942 to 1944. We analyzed the history of the forced mobilization of Asajino Airfield and the cause of death and the place of death in the list, proves the fact of forced mobilization. Analysis of victims list and materials proved that Koreans would have lived at about 1,000 to 1,200 people at Asajino Airfield and victims could be estimated at 300 to 400 people. The list of about 99 Korean victims could be obtained. When we analyzed the victims list, it was often the case that the person in charge of the construction company made false autographs when he wrote Certification for Burial and Cremation to cover up the deaths of abuse and assaults. There was also a case where the victims residence address was forged and submitted to the other government office. Koreans forced to work in the labor environment often suffer from malnutrition due to severe hardship, typhoid fever and diarrhea. 59% of Korean victims died at the Asajino Airfield site and barracks. Analysis of the list and the feed showed that Koreans were forced to work to Asajino at that time and that they were sacrificed in harsh and depressed working environments in construction sites.

일본 육지측량부 지도제작과 독도영유권 인식에 대한 고찰

서인원(Seo, Inwon) 동북아역사재단 2017 영토해양연구 Vol.14 No.-

육지측량부 발행 지도구역일람도는 공식지도로 독도를 한국 영토로 인정한 묵인 또는 승인의 효과, 금반언의 효과를 가지고 있어 국제사법재판소에서의 증명력 판단기준이 되는 중요한 자료다. 본고에서 일본 육지측량부 발행 지도구역일람도에 나타나는 독도 영유권 인식에 대해 분석하면 육지측량부 제작 지도는 지도의 영유권 묵인 또는 승인, 금반언 효과가 있어 국제법상 독도가 한국 영토임을 증명할 수 있다. 외방도 본질은 전쟁목적, 군사용 목적으로 작성한 국외영역 지도이고 육군참모본부 주도하에서 침략전쟁을 위해 제작되었다. 외방도는 본래 일본영토 이외의 외국지역에 대한 명칭이며 그 제작 경위를 보더라도 조선, 대만, 사할린 등의 일본 식민지국가와 점령지역의 지도를 외방도로 취급하였기 때문에 독도는 제2차 세계대전 종료 시까지 제국도(일본전도)에 포함시키지 않았고 제작되지도 않았다. 일본은 1888년 육군참모본부가 간행한 군사지지인 『조선지지략』에서 울릉도와 독도를 한국 영토로 인식하였고, 이것을 계승한 1899년 육지측량부 발행 ‘西鄕: 第5師管隱岐國周吉郡’ 지도는 오키제도 부분에서 독도가 일본 육군 관할이 아니기 때문에 일본 본토에 독도를 삽입하지 않았다. 육지측량부는 1887년 이후 각종 지도구역일람도를 발행하기 시작하면서 1935년까지는 일본 본토에 독도를 표기하지 않았고1 934년 일본 본토 측량을 완료한 후 1935년판 지도구역일람도를 발행하면서도 일본 본토 오키제도에 독도를 표기하지 않았고 조선전도에 독도를 표기하기 시작하였다. 1939년 육지측량부 발행 ‘울릉도 전도’에서 울릉도와 독도를 경상북도 관할로 표기하고 군사 극비문서로 육지측량부 내부문서로만 사용할 수 있도록 취급한 것은 독도가 한국 영토임을 증명해주는 좋은 자료다. 1944년 발행 5만분의 1 지형도 지도구역일람도는 주로 일본 영토만 제작한 지도로 육지측량부 지도 작성 성과의 총대성이라 할 수 있다. 이 지도구역일람도에서 독도를 일본 본토에 포함시키지 않고 한국 영토에 포함시킨 것은 독도가 일본 영토가 아닌 것을 증명해주고 있다. 그 이후19 46~1989년 간행 지도일람도 일본전도에서도 독도는 일본 혼슈 서부 오키제도에 포함되지 않았다. 이런 지도구역일람도는 일본 육군참모국 육지측량부라는 국가기관이 제작하였으므로 승인 주체가 국가라는 요건을 충족하고, 또한 지도구역일람도는 독도가 일본의 영토가 아님을 용인하고 독도가 일본의 영토라고 주장한 것이 아니므로 이는 영토주권 승인의 행위인 용인이라는 요건을 충족하고 있다. “Chizu kuiki ichiranzu” (地圖區域一覽圖) refers to district overview maps officially issued by the Japanese Land Survey Department that carries the effect of acquiescence, approval, and estoppel for Dokdo as a Korean territory. They are important sources that serve as a criterion for determining the probative power of maps in courts of international law. This paper therefore analyzes the perception of territorial sovereignty over Dokdo present mainly in the Japanese Land Survey Department"s district overview maps and proves that Dokdo is Korean territory under the international law because the maps carry the effects of acquiescence, approval, and estoppel. “Gaihozu” (外邦圖) essentially refers to maps of outer lands created for military and war purposes, and under the Japanese army’s General Staff Headquarters, they were made for wars of aggression. The term gaihozu originally referred to lands beyond Japanese territory, and considering that maps of territories Japan either colonized or occupied such as Korea, Taiwan, and Sakhalin were regarded as gaihozu, Dokdo was never included in complete maps of Imperial Japan until the end of the Second World War. Japan consistently labeled Ulleungdo and Dokdo as Korean territory in geographic publications such as “Chosen chishi ryaku” (朝鮮地誌略) issued by the General Staff Headquarters in 1888. Also, the Map of Saigo (西鄕) published by the Land Survey Department in 1899 did not include Dokdo as part of Oki Islands or mainland Japan because Dokdo was not under the jurisdiction of the Japanese Army. The Land Survey Department issued various district overview maps since 1887, but Dokdo did not appear within the boundaries of mainland Japan prior to 1935. And from 1935, Dokdo was marked and recognized as Korean territory. Especially in 1939, the “Complete Map of Ulleungdo” created by the Land Survey Department noted that Ulleungdo and Dokdo belonged to the North Gyeongsang Province of Korea, and the fact that map had been designated as a classified document for internal use only is evidence that Japan recognized Dokdo as Korean territory since 1935. The district overview map published at a 1:50,000 scale in 1944 can be considered the summation of achievements made by the Land Survey Department, which had primarily focused on mapping Japan’s territory. This 1944 edition included Dokdo as part of Korea and not mainland Japan, proving that Japan did not recognize the island as its territory at the time. Subsequent editions of the map published between 1946 and 1989 also did not include Dokdo as part of Japan’s Oki Islands. Since these district overview maps were made by a state agency called the Land Survey Department under the Japanese General Staff Headquarters, the state can be considered the agency of approval. Moreover, the maps admitted that Dokdo is Korean territory and did not claim that the island is Japanese territory, which satisfies the requirements for admission that the territorial sovereignty over Dokdo belongs to Korea.

朝鮮初期 歷史認識과 領域認識 : 『東國輿地勝覽』을 중심으로

서인원(Seo In-Won) 역사실학회 2008 역사와실학 Vol.35 No.-

A number of books were issued in many fields as a part of maintenance of new ruling system in the early Chosun Dynasty. A good number of books which were written by many officials who were also scholars were published about history and geography. Books which were published by individuals were supported by the government. Most of history books and geography books which were issued at those times reflected real contents needed in setting up a new dynasty. Those books were made use of as ways to gather revenue needed in governing the dynasty. Those books reflected efforts used to expand confucian culture which was prevailing governing ideology at that time. At that atmosphere a book named'DongKukYeoJiSeungRam' - generally perceived as a geography book- considerably reflected history perception and territory perception which is based on the former history perception. In the Korean ancient history the Chosun Dynasty raised its pride as a civilized ration by promoting understanding the level about GiJa Chosun and DanKun Chosun. The Chosun Dynasty had a characteristic viewpoint thinking Goguryeo followed Mahan in terms of the proceeding Dynastys' orthodoxy. In its territory perception superficially it declared its territory at north River Duman and River Amnok at south JeJu Island and Mara Island and at east Ulleung Island and Dokdo Island. Actually taking into consideration diplomatic conflict on Yodong region with Myeong Dynasty in the early Chosun Dynasty Chosun had not revealed its doubting about the region between Yodong and Soonchunryeong(Gonghumjin) and had missed the regions thinking that the regions had been its own territory including Daemado Island. Therefore a book named'Dongkukyeojiseungram' reflected the history and geography perception of the early Chosun Dynasty. The book showed its value as the most important basic reference which gave birth to history-geography in the late Chosun.

2007년 개정 7차 교육 과정의 내용 분석 : 사회과 교육 과정 중 역사 과목을 중심으로

서인원(Seo In-Won) 역사실학회 2007 역사와실학 Vol.34 No.-

The revision of the National Curriculum affects educational policies from minimum five years to ten years maximum afterward. Therefore it is proper that the revision be conducted by way of elaborated planning and sufficient study. The seventh revision published Feb. 2007 was not conducted without enormous efforts unconditionally and everyone knows that many people and much time were invested. But the change of the revisional direction was the way of confronting historical distortion done by the neighboring countries and included east Asian history establishing cultural history great strengthening of contents of history subject and changing into authorized textbook but the contents of history subject presented at the change were not include big change. With optional subjects at Scholastic Aptitude Test reducing from 2012 history subject which have a lot of items which are memorized will be screened and revised subjects prepare a lot of things. Instead of artificial means of making history subjects compulsory subject at the scholastic aptitude test it is thought that it is time to make history subject interesting subject which build up history view among students. It is time to change our mind into the viewpoint. In order to make this goal successful historian groups and history education groups need integrated and close study processes which guarantee needs of existing history subject deepen intimacy with students and general public expand history-favoring base through enlarging inquiry studies and interview studies and develop a variety learning methods instead of expanding the simple number of history subjects. Those are the most important matter when we change the curriculum.

고등학교 국정 국사 교과서의 비교 분석

서인원(Seo In-won) 역사실학회 2004 역사와실학 Vol.26 No.-

Although many people simply regard the textbook as one of the many reference books, it is an important study tool of the public education which was skillfully designed by the Korean education authority ; All chapters of the textbook has a certain process and degree to achieve educational goals suggested by the authority. Moreover the textbook is an essential reference book for the college entrance exam The students who consider taking the entrance exam cannot ignore the textbook This textbook has been revised by the educational authority several times and is going to face the eighth revision so soon. This research deals with the high school history textbook and compares the sixth and seventh revision. Corning eighth revision has special meaning in the history education because it should confront the East Asian History Project of China I expect this research becomes groundwork of the eighth revision of the history textbook. The major change from the sixth to the seventh revision in the history textbook is change of its structure. While the sixth revision categorized chapters by chronicle, the seventh limits the chronicle explanation and categorizes its chapters by themes : politics, society, economy, and culture. Not only categorizing, the seventh revision includes several materials for students' self-study. The seventh revision increased its volume to enrich further study section at the end of the small chapters and enriched illustrations, maps, primary sources, and glossary, These changes look positive to fulfill students who want diverse explanations and to improve students' understanding. In terms of the contents, the seventh revision eliminated uncertain facts of the Koryo politics and changed its position on the merchant activities, however, the history teachers, does not feel the major change from the seventh revision at their class. Moreover, the teachers express their complaints on the seventh revision. According to them, they have to struggle with increased volume of the textbook in the decreased class time and new explanation by theme causes confusion at the class. Therefore some teachers confess that they use both the sixth and seventh textbook at their work These things should be corrected at the eighth revision, and this research suggests five things for the next revision. First, surplus and overlapped explanations should be eliminated. Especially, the parts of the political and cultural history have too much explanation Second, the next textbook must include more diverse themes and give more discretion to the teachers. Third, dividing modern history and contemporary history should be change because it disturbs students to understand a big picture of whole Korean history. Forth, uncertain facts must be removed. Fifth, the explanation way of the textbook should intrigue students' interests.