First, I raised an issue in this article whether there had been happened something like authenticity issues in the pre-modern Korean lawsuits(SectionⅠ). The short answer is that although there were no such abstract concepts like authenticity or auth...
First, I raised an issue in this article whether there had been happened something like authenticity issues in the pre-modern Korean lawsuits(SectionⅠ). The short answer is that although there were no such abstract concepts like authenticity or authentication, pre-modern Korean parties raised, argued, and defended various issues which could be understood clearly authenticity related problems. Second, I chose a very long trial trans-script about slave ownership lawsuit of late 16th century Choson period as a sample evidence. The trial trans-script not only described all the arguments of both parties, but also all the procedures which were taken word by word. I depicted the gist of the lawsuit and analyzed it from the viewpoint of modern authenticity and chain of custody issues (Section Ⅱ&Ⅲ). Third, prohibition and punishment of the forgery of official or private documents are very useful and important to secure authenticity and chain of custody of documents, so I scrutinized the legal regime of Choson period meticulously (Section Ⅳ). Fourth, I compared so called Ib-an·Ib-ji system, which was a kind of public notary regime of Choson period, with that of the Act of public notary of ownership of land and house which was promulgated in the year of 1906 modern Korea. Finally, I concluded that it is necessary to do a study which scrutinize the history of public notary in the West and the East from the viewpoint of comparison, what were the differences and uniqueness`s and what were the results etc.