이세영 교수 실험실

이세영 생화학분자생물학회 1988 생화학분자생물학회 소식 Vol.8 No.3

문예연구_이세영_선정소감

이세영 고요아침 2016 열린시학 Vol.21 No.3

[문예연구_이세영_선정작] 열쇠 외 1편

이세영 고요아침 2016 열린시학 Vol.21 No.3

[문예연구_이세영_신작] 물집

이세영 고요아침 2016 열린시학 Vol.21 No.3

조선전기의 陳荒處 起耕과 土地所有權

이세영 한국외국어대학교(글로벌캠퍼스) 역사문화연구소 2011 역사문화연구 Vol.40 No.-

조선정부는 건국 직후부터 진황처 기경을 장려하기 위하여 두 가지 시혜적 조치를 취했다. 하나는 기경자에게 기경지의 소유권을 주는 것이었고, 또 하나는 기경지에 대해 일정 기간 면세 내지 감세 조치를 취하는 것이었다. 여기서 기경의 대상이 되는 토지는 ‘無主陳荒處’만이 아니라 소유주는 있으나 질병・이사・천재 혹은 횡탈 등의 여러 연유로 1~2년간 혹은 수년간 경작이 포기된 ‘有主陳荒處’도 있었다. 정부는 민인들로 하여금 陳荒處를 관에 신고하고 耕食하게 하려는 취지에서 立案法을 만들고, 기경을 원하는 민인들에게 입안을 발급해 주고자 했다. 그러나 실제로 진황처를 입안 받는 것은 민인들이 아니라 宮家・兩班家 등이었다. 더구나 이들 勢家들은 기경할 ‘무주진황처’를 직접 찾아내어 입안을 신청하는 것이 아니라, ‘量案 上의 無主地’와 ‘量案 外 陳荒處’를 그 起耕・陳廢의 여부를 가리지 않고 입안 받거나, 심지어는 有主陳荒處와 이미 타인이 기경하고 있는 경지까지 ‘冒出立案’하여 횡탈함으로써 소유권분쟁을 일으키고 있었다. 첫째, 기경지, 즉 ‘有主民田’의 횡탈로 인한 소유권분쟁의 경우, 소유주를 가리는 것은 어렵지 않은 일이었다. 양안 상에 ‘有主田’으로 등재되어 있거나, 田稅를 납부한 사실이 확인되면 原所有主에게 환급될 것이었다. 둘째, 本主의 여러 事故로 인하여 진황처가 되어 버린 ‘유주진황처’를 입안 받아 기경했을 때에 본주와 기경자 사이에 소유권분쟁이 일어나고 있었다. ‘유주진황처’라도 진황 상태가 오래 지속되었다면 ‘무주진황처’로 간주되기 십상이어서 실제로 양자를 구분하는 것은 쉽지 않았기 때문에 ‘유주진황처’를 입안 받아 기경한 자와 본주 사이에 소유권분쟁이 일어나고 있었던 것이다. 이에 대해서 『경국대전』에는 ‘5년 안에서는 본주에게 환급한다. 다만, 본주가 5년 안에 돌아왔을 때라도 현재 기경자가 토지가 없으면 경작지의 2/3만 본주에게 환급한다. 본주가 소장을 내고 5년 안에 立訟하지 않으면 심리하지 않는다’라는 조항을 두었다. 즉, ‘유주진황처’라도 5년 이상 기경했을 때에는 본주의 소유권은 기경자에게 이전될 수 있음을 정법화한 것이었다. 셋째, ‘무주진황처’ 기경과 관련된 소유권분쟁이 있었다. 이는 주로 ‘양안 외의 진황처’와 ‘양안 상의 무주지’를 입안 받은 궁가・양반가와 이미 기경하고 있는 민인들의 소유권분쟁으로서 조선전기에는 잦지 않았다. 그것은 조선전기에는 ‘무주진황처’가 많았을 뿐만 아니라 전대부터 ‘무주진황처’를 기경했을 경우, 기경자가 소유주가 된다는 것은 不問律이었기 때문이었다. 또 정부는 궁가・양반가 등이 입안만 받고 기경하지 않거나 민인들의 기경을 막는 것을 嚴禁하고 있었지만, 실제로 그들은 많은 率下奴婢와 率丁 등의 노동력과 財力을 투자해서 입안 받은 진황처를 기경하여 農庄을 만들고도 있었기 때문이었다. 그리고 조선전기에는 전국적이고 정기적인 양전이 실시되고 있었던 것도 그 배경이 되고 있었다. 실제로 이러한 소유권분쟁이 빈번하게 일어나는 것은 양난 이후였다. 그들은 입안을 발급받고도 스스로 기경하지 않으면서 입안을 빙자하여 입안 없이 경식하고 있는 민인들의 기경지를 빼앗거나, 그 기경지를 이미 자기 소유지로 간주하고서 기경한 민인들로부터 지대를 수취하기도 했다. 이로 인하여 기경지를... Ever since its founding, the Cho-sun government had introduced two beneficiary measures to boost the cultivation of the wildland: one is bestowing the landownership to the cultivator, and the other is giving tax-reduction or tax-exemption to the cultivated land for a certain period. The land for cultivation included the no-owner wildland as well as the owned-but-discarded land for various reasons such as diseases, natural disasters, migration etc. The government, through the process of legislation, would like to issue a document to the peoples who wanted to cultivate the land with the purpose both of understanding the realities of the wildland and of having the peoples cultivate the land. The beneficiary of the measures, however, turned out to be the royal family and the nobility class families. Moreover, instead of applying for the document through locating the no-owner wildland by themselves, the powerful families applied for the title of the land regardless of the realities both of ownership and cultivation. They even caused the title disputes over the owned land and the cultivating land by recklessly applying for the title of the lands. First, as for the title disputes over the cultivating land, that is, owned land, it was easy to settle the ownership. If either registered as owned land on the surveyed document or confirmed to have paid the land tax, the land returned to its original owner. Second, as for the dispute between the cultivator now who was given the title through applying for the document for the wildland and its original owner whose land had become the wildland for various reasons, it was not easy to settle the ownership. In The Great Canon of Statesmanship『經國大典』, it was prescribed that if not over 5 years, the land belonged to the original owner; even within 5 years, however, if the now cultivator did not have his own land, only two third of the land belonged to the original owner. The government hereby legitimated the ownership for the wildland not having claimed for over 5 years to the cultivator now. Third, as for the dispute over the cultivation of the no-owner wildland, it was a dispute between the powerful families who had come to own the wildland and the no-owner land through applying the document, and the peoples who actually cultivated the lands. It was not often the case in the early Cho-sun period, because there were not only many no-owner wildland in the period but also the unwritten law which had made it a rule that if the no-owner wildland had been cultivated for two generations, the now cultivator owned the land. The government forbade the powerful families either to idle the documented land or to hinter peoples to cultivate the land. They, in fact, were making the farmstead through cultivating the wildland, mobilizing house slaves and men. And in the period the nation wide survey of the cultivating land was taking place. These factors contributed to suppress the dispute. It was not until the post the Two Great Wars that the ownership dispute took places very often. Though having the document, the powerful families without cultivating by themselves, but under the excuse of the documentation, extorted the non-documented land from the peoples and collected the land fees. This certainly led to many ownership disputes over the cultivated lands. The document was to blame for the disputes, since it was regarded as a ownership document, thereby replacing the surveying document, the original ownership register. Under the situation that farmers became the land slaves, depriving the cultivation land, the government's cultivation policy did not bear any fruits. This, in 1634 under the reign of the King In-Jo. forced the government to make it a stipulation that in the case of no-owner wildland, the ownership belong to cultivator now. However, it could not take any legal effects, because it was not so much a law as just a provision in the land surveying regulation. The fundamental coutermeas...

Sulfobetaine methacrylate hydrogel-coated anti-fouling surfaces for implantable biomedical devices

이세영,이윤기,Phuong Le Thi,Dong Hwan Oh,박기동 한국생체재료학회 2018 생체재료학회지 Vol.22 No.1

Background: Zwitterionic molecules have been widely studied as coating materials for preparing anti-fouling surfaces because they possess strong hydration properties that can resist non-specific protein adsorption. Numerous studies on surface modification using zwitterionic molecules have been investigated, such as electrochemically mediated and photoinitiated radical polymerization. However, these methods have some limitations, including multi-step process, difficulties in producing thick and dense layers as well as the requirement of extra facilities. In this study, we report a novel zwitterionic hydrogel-coating method via Fenton reaction for the preparation of anti-fouling surfaces. Methods: Sulfobetaine methacrylate (SBMA) hydrogel was coated on polyurethane (PU) by polymerization of SBMA molecules via the Fenton reaction. The coated surfaces were characterized by the measurements of water contact angle, SEM and XPS. The anti-fouling properties of the modified surfaces were evaluated by reductions of fibrinogen absorption and cell (human dermal fibroblasts, hDFBs) adhesion. Results: SBMA hydrogel layers were coated on the PU substrates and these layers have a high affinity for water. The hydrogel coatings were highly stable for 7 days, without a significant change in surface wettability. Importantly, the hydrogel-coated PU substrates decrease 80% of surface-adsorbed fibrinogen and surface-attached hDFBs (compared with uncoated PU substrates), indicating the excellent anti-fouling activities of modified surfaces. Conclusions: The hydrogel-coated PU surfaces prepared by Fenton reaction with anti-fouling properties could have potential uses for implantable biomedical devices.

Expression of E . coli Trp Operon in L - serine Deaminase Deficient and Tryptophan Aminotransferase Deficient Mutants of Klebsiella pneumoniae

이세영,지연태,김익영 한국유전학회 1984 Genes & Genomics Vol.6 No.3

Klebsiella pneumoniae lacks tryptophanase and, therefore, is better host of the amplified trp operon for the production of tryptophan. For the purpose of host development, tryptophan repressor deficient mutation, tryptophan aminotransferase-deficient mutation and L-serine deaminase-deficient mutation were introduced into the K. pneumoniae host cell and their effects on the expression of amplified recombinant E. coli trp operon (R_6K: :Mu-trpL (Δatt) trpE^(FBR)) were examined. The trpR^- mutation derepressed the expression of the recombinant E. coli trp operon and both tat^- and ssd^- mutation also increased the activities of anthranilate synthetase and tryptophan synthetase as well as the production of tryptophan in K. pneumoniae.

조선전기의 ‘農莊的 地主制’ - ‘私債型’․‘權力型’ 農莊 形成을 중심으로-

이세영 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2013 한국문화 Vol.62 No.-

In Cho-sun period, the private loan stemmed from the "relief recommendation" which was one of the relief policies in a famine year. The relief recommendation had three kinds. One of them was the loan of the private grains, namely, the rich's lending grains to the poor farmers and peoples on the condition of interests. In the second half of Cho-sun, as the relief grains of the government grains drained, the private grains of the rich surfaced as an alternative, and government positively recommended the private loan. Particularly, during Seongjong's rein, ministers' loan for high interests was in vogue to the extent that people said "who as a minister does not loan for high interests in this world?" Under the pretext that "people can not survive without the private loan", ministers taking advantage of a fact that there was no fixed due period for repayment waited for the interests to increase. When default occurred, they took the peoples property through a forced selling. Ministers original aim was not so much the high interests as poor peoples lands and property. Being a forced selling, it was none other than an extortion. Therefore, the former's lands were all over the mountains and fields, and if accumulated, amounted to districts and provinces. In the mean time, the latter, against the effects of the private loan relief, sold out family estates, thereby becoming wanderers. The purpose of relief recommendation was lost, and the regulations were needed. In the 10th rein of Seongjong(成宗 10년, 1479), "the Canon for Statesmanship" had a regulation of "collection by presenting a case to the court." In case of default, a creditor could collect the loan by presenting the case to the court only when he reported the lending within 1 year. This regulation caused avoidance of the private loan on the part of the rich families, thereby the ways of supplying the relief grains were blocked. The king and ministers were at a crossroads: to abolish the regulation or to keep it fast. However, while the situation of shortage of relief grains continued, the land possession and the seizure of peoples' property on the part of the rich families got aggravated. However, since the Confucian literati proposed land reformism, the king and ministers could not but adopting the regulation(Jungjong 中宗 13th year, 1518). It was a compromising method to solve the shortage of the relief grains through the private loan, while curbing the land possession and plantation expansion on the part of the rich families. It also was a choice satisfying the class interests of the owners of the plantations based on the private loan. The power based plantations, in short, were greedy officials' plantations. Both the power and the status of plantations' owner were positive factors in the process of establishing plantations based either on private lands or on reclamation. The lands of those plantations, however, were bestowed in compensations for owners' merits, duty, or the goods and efforts invested in the reclamation of the waste lands and tidal flats. Contrary to this, the lands of power based plantations were mainly seized from farmers through abusing greedy officials' power. First of all, the officials explicitly robbed the common peoples of their lands using their power and status. Secondly, they took peoples' lands either by pressuring the local chiefs or in cooperations with the local officials who were either relatives or relatives by marriage. Thirdly, the local officials, under the pretext of performing duties, either appropriated peoples' lands or seized their lands as the ransom lands through false accusation. Fourthly, taking advantage of the privileges given to the aristocratic class, they persecuted both common peoples and the humbles, thereby making them slaves and seizing their lands. Fifthly, powerful courtiers like Yoon Won-hyung 尹元衡 and Sim Jeon 沈銓 meddled with both personnel affairs and criminal cases and received the bribes in exc... In Cho-sun period, the private loan stemmed from the "relief recommendation" which was one of the relief policies in a famine year. The relief recommendation had three kinds. One of them was the loan of the private grains, namely, the rich's lending grains to the poor farmers and peoples on the condition of interests. In the second half of Cho-sun, as the relief grains of the government grains drained, the private grains of the rich surfaced as an alternative, and government positively recommended the private loan. Particularly, during Seongjong's rein, ministers' loan for high interests was in vogue to the extent that people said "who as a minister does not loan for high interests in this world?" Under the pretext that "people can not survive without the private loan", ministers taking advantage of a fact that there was no fixed due period for repayment waited for the interests to increase. When default occurred, they took the peoples property through a forced selling. Ministers original aim was not so much the high interests as poor peoples lands and property. Being a forced selling, it was none other than an extortion. Therefore, the former's lands were all over the mountains and fields, and if accumulated, amounted to districts and provinces. In the mean time, the latter, against the effects of the private loan relief, sold out family estates, thereby becoming wanderers. The purpose of relief recommendation was lost, and the regulations were needed. In the 10th rein of Seongjong(成宗 10년, 1479), "the Canon for Statesmanship" had a regulation of "collection by presenting a case to the court." In case of default, a creditor could collect the loan by presenting the case to the court only when he reported the lending within 1 year. This regulation caused avoidance of the private loan on the part of the rich families, thereby the ways of supplying the relief grains were blocked. The king and ministers were at a crossroads: to abolish the regulation or to keep it fast. However, while the situation of shortage of relief grains continued, the land possession and the seizure of peoples' property on the part of the rich families got aggravated. However, since the Confucian literati proposed land reformism, the king and ministers could not but adopting the regulation(Jungjong 中宗 13th year, 1518). It was a compromising method to solve the shortage of the relief grains through the private loan, while curbing the land possession and plantation expansion on the part of the rich families. It also was a choice satisfying the class interests of the owners of the plantations based on the private loan. The power based plantations, in short, were greedy officials' plantations. Both the power and the status of plantations' owner were positive factors in the process of establishing plantations based either on private lands or on reclamation. The lands of those plantations, however, were bestowed in compensations for owners' merits, duty, or the goods and efforts invested in the reclamation of the waste lands and tidal flats. Contrary to this, the lands of power based plantations were mainly seized from farmers through abusing greedy officials' power. First of all, the officials explicitly robbed the common peoples of their lands using their power and status. Secondly, they took peoples' lands either by pressuring the local chiefs or in cooperations with the local officials who were either relatives or relatives by marriage. Thirdly, the local officials, under the pretext of performing duties, either appropriated peoples' lands or seized their lands as the ransom lands through false accusation. Fourthly, taking advantage of the privileges given to the aristocratic class, they persecuted both common peoples and the humbles, thereby making them slaves and seizing their lands. Fifthly, powerful courtiers like Yoon Won-hyung 尹元衡 and Sim Jeon 沈銓 meddled with both personnel affairs and criminal cases and received the bribes in ex...

18.19세기 양반토호의 지주경영

이세영 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 1985 한국문화 Vol.6 No.-

.

논문 대한제국기의 호구변동과 계급구조

이세영 한국역사연구회 1992 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.7