열에너지 저장 검증 실험장치 축열조 슬로싱 해석

윤정,신용훈,김현일,이형연,어재혁 한국유체기계학회 2023 한국유체기계학회 논문집 Vol.26 No.6

KAERI is building the Thermal Energy Storage Experimental verification Test loop (TESET) to verify the performance of a thermal energy storage system, one of the core technologies for the realization of the Nuclear-Renewable Hybrid Energy System (NRHES). The high-temperature thermal energy storage tank, one of the main components of TESET, plays a role in storing high-temperature thermal energy, which is very important to secure its structural integrity at high temperatures. For this purpose, high-temperature material behavior characterization and 3D-based high temperature structural integrity evaluation have been conducted. In order to evaluate the effect of sloshing in the thermal energy storage tank where the free surface of working fluid fluctuates freely by an external dynamic load, the acceleration data measured in the El Centro, Gyungju, and Pohang earthquakes were used to calculate the pressure acting on the thermal storage tank wall surface, and the relationship between the seismic load and sloshing response component was analyzed. The results show that El Centro, which has the largest intensity and duration of seismic waves, has the largest energy of seismic waves compared to other cases, while Gyungju has higher energy in some high-frequency regions. It is also found in all the cases that the absolute value of pressure fluctuation increases as the convective pressure rises near the free surface

英祖의 ‘中興’ 인식과 ‘祛黨’의 모색

윤정 역사실학회 2012 역사와실학 Vol.48 No.-

Examined in this article, are the concept of ‘Restoration(中興)’ argued by King Yeongjo, and the concept of ’Eliminating Bad Party Politics(“Geodang, 祛黨”)’ which he presented as a method and also a centerpiece of his very governance. Also examined is how and why he delivered his argument at the vestige of the Gyeongbok-gung/景福宮palace. He reminded everyone that Gyeongbok-gung was the very beginning and origin of the Joseon dynasty, and by presenting the ideology of Restoration at that very place he wished to eliminate all the corrupted party politics that were threatening his leadership. Between the concept of ‘Restoration’ subduing a disruptive incident or defeating a foreign invasion, and the concept of ‘Restoration’ rebuilding a failing dynasty, Yeongjo argued the necessity of the latter, and to achieve that he focused upon eliminating bad party politics. Announcing a royal edict at the Gyeongbok-gung palace, and emphasizing the importance of ‘Restoration’ to the present governmental officials, was all part of his intentions to insist that ‘being loyal to the king’ was the way to ‘remain pious to the ancestors.’

현종대 신덕왕후(神德王后) 종묘(宗廟) 추부(追祔)의 정치사적 의미

윤정 역사실학회 2022 역사와실학 Vol.77 No.-

This paper looks into the political meaning of placing mortuary tablets of Queen Sindeok, the wife of King Taejo, in the royal ancestral shrine, 260 years after she was excluded from the shrine, in the correlation with the Royal descendants of King Hyojong. Songsiyeol advanced an opinion to place her mortuary tablets in the shrine again by highlighting that Queen Sindeok was wife(妻) of King Taejo. This is because Queen Sindeok was excluded from the shrine in the reason that she was a concubine. As time goes on, the opinion asserted the royal command of King Taejo of Ming dynasty, which was not exist in reality, as a pretext and it turns into the general opinion(公論) by claiming that placing her mortuary tablets in the shrine was necessary for practicing filial duty to the mother of the state(國母). The change of national rituals was a response to KihaeYesong(己亥禮訟) that Sonsiyeol mentioned Sajongseol(四種說) and was criticized for degrading(貶降) King Hyojong as son of the concubine(妾子). It was for giving proof that classification of the royal legitimate descendants based on the birth order of brothers didn't prescribe status of king and queen. The space organization of the Bu’myo ritual which connects Gyeongbokgung Palace, Gyeongdeokgung Palace and Jongmyo, the royal ancestral shrine intended to nbe interlocked with the historical site where KIng Injo and King Hyojong reinstated the status of Queen Inmok and Queen Jangyeol and lived together. Eventually, placing mortuary tablets of Queen Sindeok could be criticized as the try to overcome issues of legitimacy and Bu’myo which was raised by Sajongseol to King Hyojong, confirming the status of Queen Jangyeol who wore his mourning. 본고는 태조비 신덕왕후가 종묘부묘에서 배제된 지 260여년 만인 현종대 종묘추부가 이루어진 정치적 의미를 효종 왕통과의 상관성 속에서 살펴본 것이다. 기해예송으로 물러나 있던 송시열은 정계에 복귀한 후 추부논의를 제기하였는데, 그 초점은 태조의 처로서 왕비임을 논증하려는 것이었다. 이는 태종이 신덕왕후가 첩이라는 명분으로 부묘에서 배제한 논리를 극복하려는 것이었다. 이후 추부논의는 천자의 ‘고명’을 받아 국모임을 강조하였는데, 이는 명 태조가 사망 당시 보낸 조위 사적을 재구성한 것이었다. 이를 토대로 후대왕이 효를 실현하기 위해 부묘를 실행해야 한다는 공론이 정립되었고, 현종은 이를 수용하였다. 신덕왕후의 종묘 추부는 효종을 첩자로 폄강하였다고 비판받은 기해예송에 대한 대응의 성격을 가지고 있었다. 송시열이 첩으로 규정되어 종묘에서 배제된 신덕왕후를 처로 바로 잡아 부묘를 주장한 것은 형제의 차서에 따른 종통의 적서구분이 국왕과 왕비의 위상을 규정하지 않는다는 것을 증명하기 위한 것이다. 여기에 태조의 인정과 명 황제의 고명을 명분으로 하는 추부의 논리는 반정 이후 국모로서 특별한 정치적 위상을 획득한 선조의 계비 인목왕후 및 인조의 계비 장렬왕후의 위상과 직결되어 있었기 때문에 공론으로 수립될 수 있었다. 부묘의례에서 경복궁에서 신주를 제주한 후 경덕궁에 봉안하였다가 종묘에 부묘하도록 공간을 구성한 것은 인조가 인목왕후를 복위시켜 함께 거주하고 효종이 장렬왕후를 창덕궁으로 복귀시킨 사적과 연동시키려는 의도를 보여준다. 결국 현종대의 신덕왕후 종묘추부는 사종설에 의해 제기된 효종의 적서와 부묘논란을 상복을 입는 장렬왕후의 위상을 통해 타개하려는 것이었다.

선조대 鄭澈ㆍ成渾 관작삭탈의 정치사적 의미 - 南冥學派의 정치위상 제고의 명분에 대한 분석 -

윤정 순천대학교 남도문화연구소 2016 南道文化硏究 Vol.0 No.30

본고는 임진왜란 직전 己丑獄事에 연루되어 정치적으로 숙청되었던 남명학파의 집권 세력으로의 위상 제고 과정을 옥사 확대의 실질적인 주역이었던 선조의 역할에 주목하여 정리한 것이다. 선조 23년 鄭汝立 역모 사건에 연루되어 문초를 받던 崔永慶이 옥사하는 등 기축옥 사가 확대된 것은 연루자에 대한 색출 의지를 표방한 선조의 강경한 입장에 따른 것이었 다. 하지만 임진왜란 당시 북인들이 의병 활동으로 큰 전과를 거두면서 상황이 바뀌었다. 선조 27년 최영경은 대사헌으로 追贈되었는데, 기축옥사를 무옥으로 규정한 데 따른 것이었다. 하지만 정철과 성혼의 관작삭탈의 근본적인 원인은 다른 것이었다. 정철은 붕당을 결성하고 임진왜란 당시 명에 사신으로 가서 독단적인 행위를 하여 선조의 권위를 무시 하여 조정을 떠났고, 성혼은 임진왜란 당시 御駕를 맞지 않은 혐의에 화친을 주장한 李廷馣을 옹호하는 발언을 계기로 조정에서 떠났다. 이들의 사망 후 남명학파는 기축옥사에 대한 이들의 책임성을 부각시켰으며, 선조는 자신의 관련성을 부정하고 정철과 성혼의 관작을 추탈함으로써 이를 공인하였다. 그 결 과 정철은 현인을 모함하는 奸臣으로, 성혼은 그에 偏黨하는 존재로 규정되었다. 이는 정철과 성혼을 구심으로 하는 서인의 국가운영을 근본적으로 비판하는 것이었다. 이에 따라 선조후반에는 남명학파가 국가운영의 핵심적인 역할을 수행하는 정국 개편이 이루 어졌다. Examined in this article is how the status of the Nammyeong school members (who were politically kicked out of the government right before the 1590’s war with the Japanese through the ‘Gichuk-year purge (己丑獄 事)’) were actually later reinstated and elevated to power. This examination is made keeping in mind the role of King Seonjo who planned and led the purge. It was King Seonjo’s resolve and hard-line attitude (to find accomplices to a treasonous plot) that caused the expansion of the Gichuk-year purge. In that purge Choi Yeong-gyeong (崔永慶) died in jail after being interrogated for accusations (of joining Jeong Yeo-rib/鄭汝立’s conspiracy of treason) made against him in the 23rd year of King Seonjo’s reign. But when the Northerners (北人) achieved huge victories in the war against the Japanese, the situation changed. In the 27th year of his reign, King Seonjo posthumously promoted Choi Yeong-gyeong to Daesaheon (大司憲), which was no less than labelling the Gichuk-year purge as a purge that was initiated based upon a ‘false accusation.’ But Jeong Cheol and Seong Hon were stripped of their titles - for an entirely different reason. Jeong Cheol had been ordered to leave the government for forming a political party [朋黨]. He also had to leave for stepping over King Seonjo’s authority with his arbitrary actions during his stay in Ming as a diplomatic emissary during the war against the Japanese. Meanwhile, Seong Hon was accused of failing to greet the king’s party during the war. He was also blamed for trying to vindicate Yi Jeong-am (李廷馣) who had earlier condoned the idea of making peace with the enemy. He was asked to leave the government as well. After they died, the Nammyeong school emphasized their role and responsibility in the Gichuk-year purge and King Seonjo publicly agreed with the assessment by denying his role in the matter and depriving Jeong Cheol and Seong Hon of their titles. As a result, Jeong Cheol was labeled as a sanctimonious vassal who framed honorable figures, and Seong Hon was labeled as a person who would side with such figure. This was an outright criticism thrown against the ruling of the country by Westerners. This criticism included Jeong and Seong. As a result, in the second half of King Seonjo’s reign, members of the Nammyeong school were newly invited and recruited to conduct crucial roles in dynastic governing.

학교 혁신의 과정에서 교사들의 갈등에 관한 연구

윤정,김병찬 한국교원교육학회 2015 한국교원교육학회 학술대회자료집 Vol.2016 No.11

학교에는 해마다 크고 작은 갈등이 되풀이 되고 있다. 갈등의 종류는 학교 운영 방식에 관한 것부터 수업과 생활지도 방식, 학부모와의 의견차, 교사들의 성격 차에 의한 것 등에 이르기 까지 모두 나열할 수 없을 만큼 다양하다.

딥러닝을 이용한 효율적인 인체 검출 기법 실험 및 동향 연구

조유화(Yoo-Hwa Cho),조재국(Jae-Guk Cho),한덕규(Deok-Gyu Han),구명완(Myoung-Wan Koo) 한국정보과학회 2021 한국정보과학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2021 No.12

숙종 14년 太祖 影幀 模寫의 경위와 政界의 인식

윤정 한국사연구회 2008 한국사연구 Vol.141 No.-

How it was decided to create a copy for the dynasty’s founder King Taejo during the reign of King Sukjong, and how the King’s opinion and the vassals’ opinion regarding the issue differed from each other, are the two things that are examined in this article. And of course, the political meaning of those decisions and views will be analyzed as well. Since the time of King Injo, the Kings of Joseon continued their efforts of promoting the task of creating a copy for King Taejo’s portrait, but the vassals’ opinion regarding the issue was quite different from that of the Kings, particularly after the time of King Gwanghae-gun, who was dethroned by his own vassals. Yet this situation changed during the reign of King Sukjong, who finally managed to see the task through by emphasizing the fact that a chamber that could house the Taejo’s portrait had already been established in the South extra-structure(Nambyeoljeon: 南別殿), and the fact that former King Hyojong already authorized the task itself. The vassals at the time, remembering the political Gyeongshin- year Hwanguk(庚申換局) incident, decided to honor the King’s decision, but still remained critical to the decision. The vassals’ position toward this issue was quite different from the position they had maintained toward another issue that took place earlier. Prior to this copy issue, it had been proposed that a posthumous title for King Taejo should be arranged and delivered to the past king(追上), and although some officials were strongly against this proposal, many of the vassals actively supported it and developed a position backing it up, because that proposal came from no other than renowned Song Shi Yeol(宋時烈). The proposal became a policy and was later implemented, and witnessing such events Sukjong came to the conclusion that the vassals were actually considering Song Shi Yeol’s opinion more importantly than that of the King. This issue eventually became one of the catalysts for the political Gisa-year Hwanguk(己巳換局) incident that occurred in the following years, over the issue of establishing the title(定號) for the crown prince candidate(元子). How it was decided to create a copy for the dynasty’s founder King Taejo during the reign of King Sukjong, and how the King’s opinion and the vassals’ opinion regarding the issue differed from each other, are the two things that are examined in this article. And of course, the political meaning of those decisions and views will be analyzed as well. Since the time of King Injo, the Kings of Joseon continued their efforts of promoting the task of creating a copy for King Taejo’s portrait, but the vassals’ opinion regarding the issue was quite different from that of the Kings, particularly after the time of King Gwanghae-gun, who was dethroned by his own vassals. Yet this situation changed during the reign of King Sukjong, who finally managed to see the task through by emphasizing the fact that a chamber that could house the Taejo’s portrait had already been established in the South extra-structure(Nambyeoljeon: 南別殿), and the fact that former King Hyojong already authorized the task itself. The vassals at the time, remembering the political Gyeongshin- year Hwanguk(庚申換局) incident, decided to honor the King’s decision, but still remained critical to the decision. The vassals’ position toward this issue was quite different from the position they had maintained toward another issue that took place earlier. Prior to this copy issue, it had been proposed that a posthumous title for King Taejo should be arranged and delivered to the past king(追上), and although some officials were strongly against this proposal, many of the vassals actively supported it and developed a position backing it up, because that proposal came from no other than renowned Song Shi Yeol(宋時烈). The proposal became a policy and was later implemented, and witnessing such events Sukjong came to the conclusion that the vassals were actually considering Song Shi Yeol’s opinion more importantly than that of the King. This issue eventually became one of the catalysts for the political Gisa-year Hwanguk(己巳換局) incident that occurred in the following years, over the issue of establishing the title(定號) for the crown prince candidate(元子).

英祖의 <聖學輯要> 進講과 정책적 활용 - 蕩平,均役,濬川과의 상관성-

윤정 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2006 한국문화 Vol.38 No.-

Royal Jingang/進講 Lectures of the text Seonghak Jibyo/聖學輯要 in the presence of King Yeongjo/ 英祖, and certain Policy Initiatives launched by him- Topics of Tangpyeong/蕩平 politics, Gyunyeok/均役 tax system and Dredging projects(濬川) - Lectures of the task Seonghak Jibyo/聖學輯要 in the presence of King Yeongjo were arranged for total of three times during his reign, and each time the arrangement was related to certain key projects that were led by King Yeongjo himself and well underway at the time. During the first lecture, from reading Seonghak Jibyo, King Yeongjo became interested in the notion that official discipline('紀綱') must come first before appeasing the people('安民'). So interested, he based his Tangpyeong -chaek/蕩平策 policy(policy for governmental officials' appointments) upon that very notion. During the second round, he concentrated his attention upon the chapter of Reformation(Gaengjang-ron/更張論) inside Seonghak Jibyo, which heavily influenced the King's design of the Gyunyeok/均役法 system of taxation and human forces mobilization. The third round was held in commemoration of the 60th anniversary of King Sukjong's first reading of Seonghak Jibyo in a royal lecturing session. And the arrangement was also related to the dredging project that was launched at the time. The royal lecture served as a launchpad revealing the King's intentions and plans for the project. The royal lectures of Seonghak Jibyo provided King Yeongjo with crucial information and ideological inspiration for devising his key projects and policies. And they also served as opportunities reinforcing the image of the King and establishing it as a teacher and a master(君師) who were in ultimate charge of National ruling.

“폭탄교사”가 있는 학교 문화 연구

윤정,전현욱 한국질적탐구학회 2019 한국질적탐구학회 학술대회 자료집 Vol.2019 No.추계

태종대 정몽주 추증(追贈)의 정치사적 의미 - 조선 창업 과정에 대한 명분적 정리 -

윤정 포은학회 2019 포은학연구 Vol.23 No.-

This paper looks into the political meaning of the posthumous conferment of honors for Jeong Mong-Ju during the reign of King Taejong dynasty, based on records to assassinate Jeong Mong-Ju in a series of 『the Annals of King Taejo』, 『Koryǒsa(高麗史)』 and 『Songs of Flying Dragons(龍飛御天歌)』. Assassination of Jeong Mong-Ju is arranged as a case which was led by Yi Bang-won(King Taejong). However, when we looks into the plan and its execution process, it is able to know that the case includes modified elements in content as per political fluctuation during the reign of King Jeongjong and Taejong after King Taejo’s accession to the throne. especially, it is difficult to assume that Yi Bang-won who was passer of Munkwa(文科, the civilian service examination) and didn’t do any militarily special works before made the plan to assassinate Jeong Mong-Ju by bringing people close to Yi Sung-Gye who were Yi Bang-won’s older brother and uncle and their units. the narrative like this was linked to action that King Taejong acknowledged Jeong Mong-Ju’s fidelity and did the posthumous conferment of honors for him after the enthronement. This action was for acknowledging legitimacy of political process that Yi Sung-Gye stood on restoration of Koryo dynasty by enthroning King Gongyang with him. futhermore, it was also had a purpose to prevent the collusion of opposing forces and block new political upheaval on the same principle that King Taejong admitted the loyalties of vassals who did their endeavors in the side of King Taejo, King Jeongjong and Prince Huaian(懷安大君) during the foundation of Joseon Dynasty and the First and Second Strife of princes. the person who actually played a leading role in assassination of Jeong Mong-ju was Yi Bang-Gwa(King Jeongjong) who acted as a political and military proxy of Yi Sung-Gye. he guarded Yi Sung-Gye who withdrew from the Royal court and carried out the plan, discussing closely with Yi Du-ran, Yi hwa, Yi je, and so on. this situation showed that Yi Sung-Gye was the final arbiter of assassination of Jeong Mong-Ju. however, narratives like this had a high risk of harming justification of King Taejong's enthronement that he led the political process of founding country and political affairs. Accordingly, during the reign of King Taejong and Saejong Dynasty, the role of King Taejong in the process of founding country came to the fore and its core contents consisted of describing assassination process of Jeong Mong-Ju revolving around King Taejong. as the result, foundation of Joseon Dynasty was arranged as a conflict composition between Jeong Mong-Ju who was loyal to Koryo, house of ‘Wang’ and Yi Bang-Won who founded Joseon, house of ‘Yi’, and defined as a dynastic revolution accomplished by the replacement of Heaven’s will, in spite of faithful retainers's fidelity. 본 논문은 『태조실록』 총서와 『고려사』, 『용비어천가』에 실린 정몽주 제거관련 기록을 토대로 태종대 정몽주의 증직이 가지는 정치적인 의미를 살펴본 것이다. 위의 기록에는 이방원(태종)의 주도로 정몽주의 제거가 이루어진 것으로 정리되어 있지만, 그 계획과 실행과정을 살펴보면 태조 즉위 후 정종·태종대에 걸친 정치 변동에 따라 변형된 요소를 포함하여 기록을 그대로 사실로 확정하기 어렵다. 특히 문과 급제자로서 이전까지 군사적으로 특별한 활동이 드러나지 않는 이방원이 숙부와 형에 해당하는 이성계의 최측근 인물들과 예하 부대를 동원하여 정몽주를 제거하는 계획을 세운 주체였다고 보기에는 무리가 있다. 이와 같은 서술은 태종이 즉위 후 정몽주의 고려 왕조에 대한 충절을 인정하여 증직한 조치와 연계되어 있었다. 이 조치는 이성계가 정몽주와 함께 공양왕을 옹립하여 고려왕조의 중흥을 내세웠던 정치과정의 정당성을 강화하기 위한 것이다. 나아가 조선왕조의 개국과 1‧2차 왕자의 난의 와중에 태조와 정종, 회안대군 휘하에서 절의를 다한 신료들의 충의를 태종이 인정한 것과 동일한 원리에서 반대세력의 결집을 막고 새로운 정치변란을 차단하려는 목적을 띠고 있었다. 실제 정몽주 제거에서 주도적인 역할을 한 것은 이성계의 정치적 군사적인 역할을 대행하던 이방과(정종)였다. 그는 조정에서 물러나 있는 이성계를 호위하면서 이두란과 이화, 이제 등과 긴밀히 논의하며 계획을 실행하였는데, 이러한 과정은 이성계가 정몽주 제거의 최종적인 결정자였음을 보여준다. 하지만 이러한 과정은 태종이 개국과 정사의 정치과정을 주도하였기 때문에 즉위하였다는 명분을 침해할 수 있었다. 태종-세종대에는 태종의 개국과정에서의 역할이 부각되었는데, 정몽주 제거의 과정을 태종 중심으로 서술한 것은 그에 따른 것이었다. 그 결과 조선왕조의 개국은 고려의 왕씨(王氏)에 충절을 다하는 정몽주와 이씨(李氏) 왕조를 개국하는 이방원 양자의 대립 구도 속에서 이루어진 것이며, 충신들의 절의에도 불구하고 천명(天命)의 교체에 따라 이루어진 역성혁명(易姓革命)으로 규정되었다.