• Conservation Science in Museum
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.9-14
• /
• 1999

The responsibility of keeping and caring of unearthed cultural properties belongs to the National Museum according to cultural properties protection law(law No.3644). So unearthed cultural properties are possessed by the museum after going through the regular course. Number of those cultural properties is increasing swiftly. Every year more than ten thousand units of cultural properties are unearthed. The number of unearthed cultural properties is expected to increase in the future. Howeve, the keeping facilities of the National Museum are already over-saturated. So many unearthed cultural properties are being entrusted to university museums that have bad facilities and few personnel. It makes many problems including inadequate caring. More pressing problem is that those cultural properties are not under the protection of scientific conservation processing and caring. The reason is that there are so few conservation scientists in Korea. There is no independent department of conservation science even in the National Museum, where only five members are working as conservation experts. To solve those problems, new system and organization which win take charge of conservation and care of cultural properties, that is, an organization which will consist of scientific keeping facilities and expert personnel (conservation scientists) is needed immediately.

• Korean Association of Arts Management
• /
• no.51
• /
• pp.191-219
• /
• 2019

Adoption of applicable law for the international trade of artworks is closely related to the results of lawsuits. Recently, starting with New York, the hub of the international artworks market, a modern, mixed-law is gradually being adopted more. It is difficult to designate an applicable law of an international trade of artworks through private laws regulations of relevant countries, and the public laws regulations must also be considered in relation to individual benefits and the public benefits to the relevant countries. With regards to the foreign relations issues, Korea's private international law embraces a so-called public order theory, and according to the Section 7 of the Act on the Private International Law and its enactment history, the compulsory provision, which seems appropriate for application to the corresponding matter, applies without regards to the selection of the applicable law. The Civil Act of Korea acknowledges bona fide acquisition of a cultural asset, in principle, if the Cultural Heritage Protection Act is not applicable. Moreover, a lost artwork is also a subject of bona fide acquisition; however, if the relevant artwork is either stolen or lost, the original owner has the right to demand the return of that artwork within 2 years of being stolen or lost according to the Section 250 of the Civil Act. Also, if the buyer purchased from a distributor specializing in the artworks, such as auction, open market or gallery, the buyer could request a compensation of the purchase price from the original owner, and if the buyer purchased through a private transaction, the buyer cannot demand a compensation of the purchase price and must return the artwork.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.54 no.3
• /
• pp.24-51
• /
• 2021

Since June 2006, there have been active efforts to systematize the permission system including the amendment of [Cultural Heritage Protection Act]. Cultural Heritage Administration prepared standards on reviewing each type of cultural heritages(CH) in 2015, promoted a project on the modification of permission standards and showed remarkable performances in quantitative aspects. But as there has been little change for the cases applied for permission, additional studies on policy are required to improve the management efficiency and reduce the citizens'inconvenience. In response, this study aims to identify the actual management status on the current state alteration permission system, and establish practically utilizable reference materials at permission review. While historic sites(HS) constitute a relatively small proportion in state-designated CHs, they are subject to the designation of permission standards. Also, with their location in the downtown area, the application rate is high (51.4%) and the results are commonly utilizable to other types of CH. We constructed a DB based on the minutes of Cultural Heritage Committee(CHC) on HS and categorized similar features in permission handling results. The result of the analysis is as follows. Out of a total of 5,243 cases for permission applied for HS, 1,734 cases of cultural heritage areas(CHA) and 3,509 cases of historic and cultural environment preservation areas(HCEPA) have been applied. CHA has a great proportion of the applications for events and festivals, which are highly related to CHs or representing the local area. There is a high permission rate on applications for the purpose of public service by local governments. Meanwhile, HCEPA has a high proportion of applying for the installation and extension of buildings and facilities at the private level. Thus, negative decisions were made for tall buildings, massed facilities, or suspected scattering of similar acts. Our actual condition analysis has identified a total of 78 types of harmful acts which may influence the preservation of CHs. 31 types in CHA and 37 types in HCEPA are categorized. Especially, 10 common types of permission have been confirmed in both sectors. As a result, it is expected to secure consistency in the permission administration, enhance the management efficiency and improve the public's satisfaction over the regulatory administration by providing practically utilizable reference materials for altering the current state of CH and for decision making on the part of CHC.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.144-166
• /
• 2024

The Cultural Heritage Committee is an important organization that has been deliberating on important matters related to the preservation of cultural properties in the Republic of Korea for more than 60 years since 1962. The Cultural Heritage Preservation Committee was active in 1961, which was a short period of about a year, but the minutes prepared at the time confirmed that it had the following meanings. First of all, legally, it was meaningful in that the concept of cultural property or intangible cultural property was used for the first time in Korea in laws and regulations on the term of office of professional members. These matters became the basis for the operation of the current Cultural Heritage Protection Act and the Cultural Heritage Committee. The following confirms that, unlike previously known activities, they were active despite political upheaval at the time. In spite of rapid regime change at the time, the committee had no change in its members, and the meetings continued without interruption. At that time, there was an exclusive relationship between different groups in relation to the preservation of cultural heritage, and this relationship was confirmed by the minutes that disappeared with the establishment of the Cultural Heritage Management Bureau, which integrated these groups. Finally, the form of the minutes prepared then shows the form of documentation at the time, where it is confirmed that the traditional documentation format is changing into a new form. It can be good research material in terms of modern and contemporary bibliography. As discussed earlier, the Cultural Heritage Conservation Committee of 1961 has historical significance in terms of legal and actual activities. The reason why the committee's activities were low valued is presumed to be that the minutes and related documents prepared at the time were not organized well due to the lack of a related administrative system. The minutes of the Cultural Heritage Conservation Committee record various facts about cultural heritage policies and decisions at that time. Therefore, analysis and research on these contents can reveal more facts about the cultural heritage policies and perceptions of that time.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.22-43
• /
• 2016

State Ownership of Excavated Cultural Heritage System was originated from the legislations concerning cultural objects during the Japanese colonial period (1910~1945) and was succeeded by the present Buried Cultural Properties Act enacted in 2011. Despite the importance of the system that completes the outcomes of excavations and determines the state-owned cultural properties, the foundation of national heritage, it has been limitedly regarded as administrative area and neglected by the academic scholars or policy researchers. Recently the traditional culture has drawn increasing domestic interest and awareness that the cultural heritage contributes to building cultural identity and vitalizing tourism has led to increasing the demand of a local government's role in management of the state-designated cultural heritage and even fighting for hegemony in securing the cultural objects between the central and local governments. Despite the continuing efforts for improving the selection process of cultural heritage and its management institution, establishment of an advanced objective system has been requested. This paper is intended to suggest the policy direction through demonstrating the problem and assignment caused in the process of implementing the Buried Cultural Properties Act and reviews the State Ownership of Excavated Cultural Heritage System from the legal point of view accordingly. First, I suggest improving the selection process of the state-owned cultural properties. Even though current law states that Administrator of Cultural Heritage Administration reviews the research reports and selects the possible candidates for the state-owned cultural properties almost all the cultural objects listed on the reports are practically selected. In this regard, two possible resolutions can be made; newly establishing a separate process for selecting the state-owned cultural properties after publishing the report or adding the selection process of the state-owned cultural properties during the heritage selection meeting. Either way should contribute to strengthening the impartiality and objectivity of the policy. My second suggestion is improving the operating system of the heritage selection meeting in which the cultural properties to be listed on the reports are determined. Given the present extensive assessment criteria, there is much room for certain experts' subjective opinions. Therefore, in order to enhance the fairness and credibility of the heritage selection meeting, specifying the assessment criteria and advance review of the expert list are necessary. Third, this paper suggests increasing the local government's role in management of the state-owned cultural heritage and diversifying the heritage management institution. Development of a local self-governing system has led to the increased demand for delegating the authority of the state-owned heritage management to the local governments. Along with this, the gradual improvements of public museum management raises the need for expanding the cultural benefits through increasing the local government's role in management of the state-owned heritage. Considering the fact that overall majority of the art collections housed at national or public museums is owned by the central government, developing a variety of heritage contents and vitalizing the heritage tourism are crucial. The true meaning and value of the state-owned cultural heritage hidden at the storage of a museum can be found when they are shared together with the public.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.110-125
• /
• 2017

The Cultural Properties Protection Act enacted 1962 to encourge culture level of people by preserving and using cultural properties introduced Cultural Properties Change Permission System in 2000 in order to cope with rather targeted range towards the national designated cultural properties, and introduced the Guidelines for Permission Standard regarding Construction Activities within the Historical Cultural Environment Preservation Area (2006) to complement permission process and targets, Notification of Minor Changes around the National Designated Cultural Properties (2008), etc and continuously put efforts to improve further ever since. Nonetheless, while it showed decrease in the number of process of change permission per individual cases after 2007, it began to increase again since 2010, reaching 1,554 cases by 2014 - about 29% of the cases being rejected or under observation, people living surrounding of cultural properties still experience inconveniences. This study has been carried out by creating integrated DB with total 7,403 cases of permission status from 5 Subcommittees (Building / Historic Sites / Natural Heritage / Modern Cultural Heritage / Important Folk Culture) in Cultural Heritage Committee that are related with changing status for the past 5 years (2010-2014), and by further analyzing 4,364 cases amongst, that were reviewed within historical and cultural environment preservation area - analyzed applying types and the characteristics, reviewed the improvement plans of operation guidelines for the Committee and acts of minor changes towards surroundings of the national designated cultural properties that regulate the status changing permission targets by categorizing analysis results and deriving implications. I hope that this will complement to the operational guidelines for the Committee, along with minor changing activities around cultural properties in short term, and to secure basic data for systematic improvement plans ie., for delegated works range from city/county/districts through our research. Also hope to improve administrative efficiency by reforming permission systems for building activities in historic cultural environment conservation area, and reduce inconvenience people might experience, by minimizing socioeconomic expense needed for the review.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.37 no.6
• /
• pp.48-56
• /
• 2010

Since ancient times, Korea has been called a land of beauty. Scenic sites under the Cultural Properties Protection Act include picturesque places that are famous for their natural scenic beauty as well as their historical and cultural value. Scenic sites are managed as natural assets to promote their preservation and use. However, the management of scenic sites can produce adverse effects on regional development and ownership rights. Moreover, the purpose of their designation as cultural assets is not fully understood because scenic sites are managed by focusing on restraint on users' act the same as was applied to historic sites. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to protect inhabitants' rights of ownership by arranging the boundaries of designated areas and by providing standard permission for condition changes in the Buryeongsa Valley, which was designated as a Scenic Site in 1979. The results of this study can be summarized as follows: First, arranging the boundaries of the designated area includes the arrangement of the edge lines standardized on the visual range of the mountain ridge, preventing the loss of landscape beauty in the designated district; the internal clearing district focuses on the existing settlement. Gearing the designated areas after the arrangement of the boundaries results in $11,928,932m^2$, 38.6% compared to the existing designated areas. Second, it establishes a 500m buffer zone inside the radius of the boundary of the cultural asset as a standard for condition changes that seriously affect landscape preservation. Third, the standards for permission on building 'height regulations' are divided into flat and gable, according to the roof shape. The adopted standard is 8m high for 2 story flat roofs, and 12m high for 2 story gable roofs.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.46-57
• /
• 2003

The Yangdong traditional historic village is a representative village having symbolic historic values and unique combinations of natural, cultural, and social characteristics of a Korean historic settlement environment, which has been protected by Cultural Asset Protection Law since 1984. Now, in spite of its potential diverse powers, national strategies concerning Yangdong village do not have satisfactory direction and results. In consideration of this notion, this paper is designed to find and to understand the current state of Yangdong village. This paper aims to analyze The changes in Yangdong village between 1994 and 2002, and through these comparisons, to diagnose and predict future aspects of Yangdong village. Primary data was collected by questionnaire investigation between 1994 and 2002. The living conditions, production, and consciousness of residents of Yangdong village are utilized as standards of analysis. The final analysis results can be summarized as follows: because of the Cultural Asset Protection Law, noticeable changes have occurred in Yangdong village over the last 8 years. These change are different from the ones occurring in general farm villages. Also, most issues related to the changes are interpreted as occurring as a result of the top-down approach, which disregards the opinions and wishes of residents. For this, introduction of renovation concept that emphasizes modernization of life and production space is urgently required. To this end, it is necessary that concern for the traditional historic village should diversity and expand, and not concentrate solely on the cultural properties and architecture-oriented historic elements.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.56-85
• /
• 2010

UNESCO World Heritage Programme was introduced following the adoption of Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972 in order to protect cultural and natural heritage with superb value for all mankind. Despite its short history of less than 40 years, it has been evaluated as one of the most successful of the cultural area projects of UNESCO with 890 world heritage registered worldwide. For systematic protection management of World Heritage, UNESCO, through systemization of registration, emphasis on the importance of preservation management plan, institutionalization of monitoring, and operation of World Heritage Fund, has utilized World Heritage Programme not just as a means of listing excellent cultural properties, but as a preservation planning tool, and accordingly, such policies have had a significant influence on the cultural heritage protection legislations of numerous nations. Korea has ratified World Heritage Convention in 1988, and with the registration of the Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty in 2009, it has 9 World Heritage Sites. Twenty years have passed since Korea joined the World Heritage Programme. While World Heritage registration contributed to publicity of the uniqueness and excellence of Korean cultural properties and improvement of Korea's national culture status, it is now time to devise various legislative/systematic improvement means to reconsider the World Heritage registration strategy and establish a systematic preservation management system. While up until now, the Cultural Properties Protection Law has been amended to arrange for basic rules regarding registration and protection of World Heritage Sites, and some local governments have founded bodies exclusive for World Heritage Site management, a more fundamental and macroscopic plan for World Heritage policy improvement must be sought. Projects and programs in each area for reinforcement of World Heritage policy capacity such as: 1) Enactment of a special law for World Heritage Site preservation management; 2) enactment of ordinances for protection of World Heritage Sites per each local government; 3) reinforcement of policies and management functionality of Cultural Heritage Administration and local governments; 4) dramatic increase in the finances of World Heritage Site protection; 5) requirement to establish plan for World Heritage Site preservation protection; 6) increased support for utilization of World Heritage Sites; 7) substantiation and diversification of World Heritage registration; 8) sharing of information and experiences of World Heritage Sites management among local governments; 9) installation of World Heritage Sites integral archive; 10) revitalization of citizen cooperation and resident participation; 11) training specialized resources for World Heritage Sites protection; 12) revitalization of sustainable World Heritage Sites tourism, must be selected and promoted systematically. Regarding how World Heritage Programme should be domestically accepted and developed, the methods for systemization, scientific approach, and specialization of World Heritage policies were suggested per type. In the future, in-depth and specialized researches and studies should follow.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.166-177
• /
• 2016

This essay explores the problems with applying the concept of "original form" to natural heritage when it is based on originality and diachronic, historical period. It also suggests an alternative perception that the concept of "original form" can be considered based upon "integrity". First, the conceptual framework for applying the concept of "original form" falls into three types: one that centers on the time point at which heritage originated; another that respects the diachronic characteristics of the concept of "original form"; and the last that bases original form on a particular time after the heritage originated. Second, the national policy for the conservation of natural monuments and scenic sites stayed at the level of consulting the Decree on the Preservation of Treasures, Historical Remains, Scenic Sites, and Natural Monuments of Joseon, under Japanese colonial rule. And after the legal framework was established through enacting and proclaiming of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in 1962, 564 cases have been designated as natural monuments. Third, the natural conservation movement, the first national policy for natural heritage, was initiated from the heritage field, but the Environment Ministry subsumed all nature-related policies and ever since the heritage agency (Cultural Heritage Administration) has implemented only heritage policies regarding "cultural" heritage. The present state of the coexisting policies about the natural heritage by the Environment Ministry and the Cultural Heritage Administration resulted in leading the public confused about official terms and main policy agency of natural heritage. Fourth, the difficulty of applying the concept of "original form" to natural heritage stems from the fact that natural heritage is inherently distinct from cultural heritage, which is placed at the center of the heritage policies implemented by the heritage agency. In addition, natural heritage, similarly distinct from the overall natural environment, has evolved in a way that incorporates human culture and thus diversely includes characteristics of originality, diachrony, and historical period. Under these circumstances, an incorporative, professional approach is required rather than independent approaches for each type of natural heritage. In conclusion, this essay suggests that issues related to the restoration of original conditions of natural heritage should be resolved through the application of the "integrity" concept by restoring "the characteristics of an object or a place that imbue it with meaning and value," with consideration given to efforts for alleviating logical contradictions within the concept of "original form" through the preparation of standards and guidelines for the restoration of original condition.