• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.222-267
• /
• 2001

The purpose of this document is to explain the revisions of the Protection of Cultural Properties Act and its sub-laws which have been mad from Jan. 1999 to Sep. 2001. The Protection of Cultural Properties Act and its sub-laws have been revised three times from 1999 to 2001, before and after the Office of Cultural Properties was raised to Cultural Properties Administration on May 24, 1999. The main points of the revisions are as follows. First of all, the role of the local autonomous entities has been increased. The governor of the local autonomous entities is entitled to announce administrative orders related to the preservation of State-designated Cultural Properties. Also, the local autonomous entities has the authorities to examine whether the construction work which will be made in the outer boundaries, which is provided by regulations, of the protected area of the cultural properties might have any effect on preservation of cultural properties or not. Second, preventive actions to protect the cultural properties have been strengthened. If the scale of construction work is more than some scale, the preliminary survey of the surface of the earth to confirm the existence of buried cultural properties and their distribution is obligated. One who is promoting the development plan more than some scale must discuss the plan with the Administrator of Cultural Properties Administration in the process of planning. These actions would be effective to prevent the cultural properties from being damaged because of the development. Third, relaxation of the restrictions has been proceeded. On the basis of regulations which specify the actions to affect the preservation of cultural properties, negative system that does not limit the actions which are not specified in the regulations is introduced. The appropriateness of both protected structure and area should be regularly reviewed and adjusted. Also, most of the restrictions which was made only for administrative convenience and over-regulated the people's living have been revised. Finally, the number of cultural properties to be protected has been increased. Besides the State-designated Cultural Properties, the other cultural properties which are worthy to be protected as City-or-Province-designated Cultural Properties can be designated provisionally and protected. The system of registration and maintenance of the buildings and facilities which are not designated as the Modern Cultural Heritages is established. The penalty for damaging and stealing the cultural Properties which are not designated to be protected was strengthened. Even a dead natural monument can be acknowledged as an natural monument and it is limited to make a specimen or stuffing of the dead natural monument. All of these actions are fit to the high level of understanding of the public about the cultural properties and as the result of these actions, the number of cultural properties to be preserved has been increased. To sum up, the directions of revisions of the Protection of Cultural Properties Act and its sub­laws which have been made from Jan. 1999 to Sep. 2001. are the localization of the protection of the cultural properties, the strengthening of protective actions, the relaxation of various regulations and the increasing of the number fo the protected cultural properties. Also, various problems raised in the processes of implementations of the laws have been reviewed and revised.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.35-50
• /
• 2022

The Korean cultural heritage protection act, enacted in 1962, is known to have been enacted in imitation of the Japanese cultural heritage protection act. The Japanese law differs from the current law dealing with intangible cultural heritage, folklore materials, and buried cultural properties. The Japanese law was enacted in consultation with the GHQ, and reflected the historical issues at the time of the enactment. Recently, in Japan, GHQ documents have been released and so research on the cultural heritage protection act is carried out. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the meaning and achievements of the Japanese cultural heritage protection act before comparing it with the Korean law. GHQ stipulated the emperor as a symbolic entity in the Japanese constitution and prescribed the country as a liberal democracy. Influenced by this, the cultural heritage protection act was enacted to identify the people's cultural heritage. Accordingly, the cultural heritage protection committee is a private and independent organization in Japan. The committee designates cultural heritage assets, and it operates as the national museum and the cultural heritage research institute. This system was a part of policy changes shifting cultural heritage management to the private sector. Since many cultural heritages are associated with the imperial family, museums were managed by the imperial family. Meanwhile, the Japanese house of councillors persuaded GHQ, which was negative about including intangible cultural heritage in the cultural heritage protection act. The purpose of this idea was to provide the system of the government support for Japanese imperial court music and dance. In addition, folk materials were included with the consent of the GHQ in that they represent the cultural heritages and the academic achievements of the people at the time in Japan. According to the Korean Law, the subject of designation of cultural heritage is the government, and the cultural heritage committee acts as an advisory body with its limited functions. In the early days, the committee confused the concept of intangible cultural heritage and folklore materials. This was because the concepts of cultural property was borrowed from Japanese law and applied to the Korean law without a full understanding. In response, the cultural heritage committee urged the ministry to investigate the current situation in Japan. The cultural heritage committee, mainly consisting of folklore scholars, was confused about the concepts of intangible cultural heritage and folklore materials, but the concept became clear when the enforcement regulations of the cultural heritage protection Act was enacted in 1964.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.171-179
• /
• 2005

Korea has many underwater cultural heritages within the east, west and south seas surrounding the Peninsula that indicate historically important sealanes for trade and transportation. As these underwater cultural heritages are the objects of despoilment because of their relatively easy access through modern technology, their often high historical and priceless value demands strong protection similar to or better than the land cultural properties. Currently, Korea does not have any concrete laws or regulations for the protection of underwater cultural heritages. Thus, these heritages iu, somewhat temporary and inappropriately subjected to laws and regulations relating to provisions of individual Laws concerning protection of cultural properties act, and statute of excavation of material fir buried national property, lost articles act etc.. Internationally, the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage was adopted but not yet entered into force. Therefore, the protection of underwater cultural heritage has become an urgent matter. In this regard, this article's main purpose is to provide recommendations for improving direction of legal regime and policy for protecting our underwater cultural heritages. These legal regimes need provisions for definition of the underwater cultural heritage, scope of application, ownerships, jurisdictions and protection measures. And suggestions are provided in regard to policies for the protection of underwater cultural heritages that may improve organization and cooperation among concerned ministries and agencies, compensation system, restrictions for excavation of underwater relics, efficiency of survey of underwater surface and information system.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.55 no.3
• /
• pp.178-188
• /
• 2022

This article cites examples of cultural heritages that urgently require protection measures, and the reinterpretation of beacons, fortresses, and extremities identified in the process of conducting a cultural heritage investigation of the DMZ and bordering areas. It is true that there are various difficulties involved in implementing thorough protection measures considering the reality of the two Koreas' division. Despite this, the "Ordinance for the Protection of Military Cultural Properties" and the "Act on the Protection and Investigation of Buried Cultural Heritage" have been enacted and are in effect. In particular, in the "Ordinance for the Protection of Military Cultural Properties," the value of protecting "military assets" is emphasized. The identification and investigation of cultural heritages in the DMZ and border areas must continue. Although field research is currently difficult, the primary investigation conducted by high-altitude terrain analysis and literature research is considered effective. Furthermore, there are parts that require correction and supplementation with future field investigations. Although some trial and error is expected during these various cultural heritage investigations, they need to continue.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.18-41
• /
• 2011

The Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Korea has begun since1962 when the Cultural Properties Protection Act was established. Korean ICH Safeguarding system is initially derived from Cultural Properties Protection Act in Japan. Japan has started Important ICH Designation System in 1954 to concede the skills and artistic talents holders, thus it could implement the multilateral system management for adopting different ICH protection systems such as Important Intangible Folklore Properties, Selection and Preservation Techniques, and Documenting Records. However, Korea has solely adopted Important ICH Designation System since Cultural Properties Protection Act was introduced. Korean ICH Safeguarding System represented by the Certification System of ICH Skill Holders is to ensure skills and artistic holders who perform the elements of Intangible Cultural Heritage, and manage the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage in order to let the skills and artistic holders instruct inheritors. As a result, it could build up the internal foundation for the diffusion of inheritors and established the related organizations. However, the inheritor-centered protection system has caused many problems as it is being lasted for more than fifty years. Fragmented designation measures, the cultural power of skill holders, and the research and evaluation methods have pointed out the difficulties of safeguarding and preservation measures of ICH. Moreover,the legitimacy of safeguarding system related in the authenticity of transmission in ICH has emerged to review the safeguarding system of ICH with diverse viewpoints. Therefore, this paper will review the implementation process and achievement of ICH safeguarding system to examine the problem and causes of the safeguarding system. The conference records of Cultural Property Association and articles of cultural properties policies directors, Cultural Property Association members, and professional experts are being used for the initial materials of this paper, and it is examined for the contents of designation system of Important Cultural Heritage, rather than overall cases. Thus such problems the limitation of expansion in ICH lists as inheritor-centered designation system, hierarchical and exclusive transmission system, inappropriate concept of archetype as the principle of ICH transmission are derived from the root of Important ICH designation system. Thus this paper demonstrates that this system must be revised for the expansion of ICH safeguarding system in Korea and points out multilateral protection system should be established as well as Certification System of Important ICH skill holders.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.288-318
• /
• 2023

This work began with the aim of examining the history of the concept "cultural property" that is expected to disappear, and the main subject of research was the history that preceded the spread of this notion throughout society. The phrase "cultural property" first appeared in the 1920s, and was used in various fields such as literature, history, music, and philosophy in the context of cultural resources. Until immediately following liberation from the Japanese colonial era, the meaning of cultural assets was widely applied in the range of "cultural resources," and during this period, it was often used to help supplant the reality and history of Japanese occupation. Immediately after the Korean War, it was also employed for the purpose of 'restoration of cultural resources through war'. Recognition of cultural property directly influenced by Japan's Cultural Heritage Protection Act has occurred since 1950s. In the early 1960s, the enactment of various laws related to cultural properties and the establishment of the Cultural Heritage Administration caused the meaning of cultural property to be limited to 'cultural heritage'. In this way, the definition of state-led cultural property has continued to apply to this day. It has not been clearly confirmed whether the concept of cultural properties was imported from Japan through means such as the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. Cases in which several Japanese students endorsed the concept of cultural property within Korea serve to increase the likelihood that the concept was indeed imported from Japan. However, "coined language using multiple Chinese characters," "the phenomenon of cultural complex words in the 1920s,", and "cases of non-Japanese international students using the concept of cultural property" also open up the possibility of their own occurrence. Apart from the general importance of the concept of cultural property, intellectuals at the time used this concept to promote internal development and the overcoming of colonial Joseon. In this research, it was confirmed that the conceptual word cultural property was older and had a wider history than the general perception had indicated previously. The history of the conceptual term "cultural property" may appear to be more than 60 years old based on the enactment of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act, but in fact it is nearly 100 years old when traced back to on 1925, as established here. In general, the creation and disappearance of terms may proceed naturally with social change, but such terms may alternatively be created or erased through national policy. Identifying the origins of a phrase that is about to disappear represents a significant task for purposes of establishing its historical meaning.

• Korean Journal of Agricultural Science
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.193-203
• /
• 2014

Natural Monument is a designated cultural property as part of the country. According to Article 2 of the Cultural Properties Protection Act, a national, ethnic and global heritage artificially or naturally formed, with a great historical, artistic, scientific and landscape significance is defined as a cultural heritage. Animals, plants, topography, geology, minerals, caves, biological products and special natural phenomena, having a great of historic, scenic and scientific value, are defined as the monument. According to Article 3 of Cultural Properties Protection Act, the conservation, management and utilization of National Heritage should be kept intact in its original form. So, Natural monuments are managing as retained its original form under the Basic Principles of current law. The highest population of coniferous tree in natural monument plant is ginkgo tree including 22 objects, followed by pines, junipers that order. And in case of broadleaf tree, there are zelkova trees, retusa fringe trees, pagoda trees, cork oaks, silver magnolias and etc. There are many of reported efficacy in available natural monument plants. The efficacy of plant species on pharmaceutical like anti-cancer, anti-diabetic, anti-obesity, antioxidant activity, neuroprotective, improves cholesterol, anti-inflammatory, liver protection and anti-bacterial efficacy, on cosmetics and beauty like the inhibiting formation of skin wrinkles, whitening effect, variety of materials and the efficacy of the proposed utilization of its various papers and etc have been widely reported. Before the Nagoya Protocol enters into force, the future role of the National Research Institute for Cultural Properties Administration of Cultural Heritage should be obtain a legal right to manage the social, cultural and national natural monument with emotional value to the plant genetic resource as a natural monument efficient ways to study and preserve traditional knowledge biological resources by securing a claim to the sovereignty of the material will be ready.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.36 no.2
• /
• pp.30-37
• /
• 2018

The uniformed regulations for control of the height of buildings owned by individuals to protect landscape of cultural properties are causing serious social conflicts by limiting the development of landowners. It is urgent need of introducing indicators that can resolve such conflicts and evaluate the regulations of buildings, which can satisfy urban development as well as landscape management of cultural properties. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to simulate landscape changes according to the Cultural Heritage Protection Act and National Land Planning and Utilization Act by using Unity3D in the Pungnammun Gate(Treasure No. 308) of Jeonju and its surroundings, where architectural cultural property forms the symbolic landscape of the city. Then some items such as view points, target points were introduced and the quantitative evaluation of landscapes was attempted by applying the indicator of 3D Visual Exposure. As a result, the viewing opportunity and viewing area of Pungnammun Gate were not significantly influenced by changes in landscape according to the two laws. However, the change of the height of buildings by the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, which has the greatest development capacity, confirmed the possibility of weakening the identification of the Pungnammun Gate by increasing 3D Visual Exposure of the background buildings more than two times. Finally, it was confirmed that the skyline of Pungnammun Gate was clearly infringed upon development under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, but the skyline was maintained similar to the current situation in the regulation by the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. Thus, this study is meaningful in that the application of 3D Visual Exposure showed the possibility of utilization as an indicator for quantitatively evaluating the protection of view on cultural property and skyline according to the changes of building heights.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.74-95
• /
• 2009

Folk villages have higher historic and cultural values than other villages and contain considerably many traditional elements today. In Korea, there are seven folk villages that are under the protection of the Cultural Properties Protection Act. Unlike other kinds of tangible cultural assets individually appointed according to the act, those folk villages are protected by the act in entirety including the houses and auxiliary structures inhabited and used by the villagers. Since the act covers the entire villages, the residents are not allowed to repair or renovate their structures and accordingly suffer from huge limitations in everyday life with housing life under the biggest restrictions. Being appointed as a folk village is positive from the perspective of preserving the village. However, it is negative to the villagers because of the limitations to their housing lives. While common people lead a convenient life by the introduction of high technologies in modern society, they do not get to benefit from such technologies for the cause of preserving the traditional culture. Upon the appointment, they are subject to all sorts of building regulations and under huge direct and indirect influences of those regulations across many different aspects of life including housing life. Thus the residents of folk villages do have many complaints about the act. It is only natural that there occur conflicts between the state, which tries to preserve the traditional culture according to the act, and the residents, who pursue convenience in life. At the same time, it is natural too that the residents have the desire to pursue convenience in daily life. Thus they renovate their houses illegally. The government agencies are aware of that, however, it is not right for them to enforce the act and restrict their daily lives. Their tacit approval of such illegal renovations is the product of compromises between the residents' right to their private property and the state's policies of cultural asset protection. The residents try to renovate their houses within the limit that will not call for legal restrictions from the government agencies. The government allows for renovations as long as they are within the minimum limit. It is the result of efforts for the state and the residents to stitch up and compromise their own complaints.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.1
• /
• pp.64-87
• /
• 2020

The cultural property management system of Korea was established based on the modern cultural assets acts and the old imperial estate management system enacted during the Japanese occupation. Academics have researched the cultural property management system oriented on the modern cultural assets acts, but few studies have been conducted into the old imperial estate management system, which is another axis of the cultural property management system. The old imperial estate was separated from the feudal capital by the Kabo Reform, but was dismantled during the colonial invasion of Japan and managed as a hereditary property of the colonial royal family during the Japanese colonial period. After establishment of the government, the Imperial Estate Act was enacted in 1954 and defined the estate as a historical cultural property managed by the Imperial Estate Administration Office. At this time, imperial estate property that was designated as permanent preservation property was officially recognized as constituting state-owned cultural assets and public goods in accordance with Article 2 of the Act's supplementary provisions during 1963, when the first amendment to the Cultural Property Protection act was implemented. In conclusion, Korea's cultural property formation and cultural property management system were integrated into one unit from two different sources: modern cultural assets acts and the old imperial estate property management system. If the change of modern cultural assets acts was the process of regulating and managing cultural property by transplanting and applying regulations from Japan to colonial Joseon, the management of the imperial estate was a process by which the Japanese colonized the Korean Empire and disposed of the imperial estate. Independence and the establishment of the government of the Republic of Korea provided the opportunity to combine these two different streams into one. Finally, this integration was completed with the establishment of the Protection of Cultural Properties Act in 1962.