• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.146-159
• /
• 2014

After inspecting ground surface or excavating cultural heritage site, the government can take measures for the preservation of buried cultural heritage based on the related law. It means that the provisions complement the limitation of current cultural heritage management system by extending the scope of cultural heritage to be preserved. But we neither have set any matters about implementing the measures for preservation of the buried cultural heritage, nor manage the heritage and its surroundings after implementing the measures. Due to these insufficiency of the law, there arise several problems in the field. For example, the measures for preservation are not complete, or preserved cultural heritage is damaged due to inappropriate management. We have to resolve the problems in order to accomplish the original purpose of taking measures for preservation of the heritage. First, it is necessary to make sure of the legal status of preserved buried cultural heritage, to establish the standards to decide whether to preserve it or not. We need to have regulations by law or internal rule on the daily management, who should manage it, what and how the manager should manage. It is also important for local residents to take an active part in preserving and utilizing the cultural heritage as the owner. Through building up the foundation mentioned above, the meaning and value of preserved buried cultural heritage can be expanded widely.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.82-103
• /
• 2017

Systems operating construction expenses for preservation and repair of the architectural heritage may be divided into two in the Japanese colonial era. They are preservation cost nd preservation cost-aided constructions, according to the ownership of a building. Preservation cost construction refers to preservation and repair of government-owned buildings that Japanese Government General of Korea had the ownership and the right of management, and preservation cost-aided construction means preservation and repair of private buildings such as Buddhist temples. In the case of preservation and repair of buildings owned by the government, it was done by the Japanese Government General of Korea, so the same agent executed the budget and managed the properties. They included royal tombs and relics, old government offices, Hyanggyo and some Seowon. On the other hand, in the case of preservation and repair of private buildings, they were private properties, so Japanese Government General of Korea had rights only for permission of preservation and repair. If there was a request for .preservation and repair by an owner, the Japanese Government General of Korea decided on whether it would support its expenses or not and played a role of management and supervision. It applied to Buddhist shrines and pagodas owned by Buddhist temples and shrines and temples owned by individuals and families. Hence, in the case of government-owned buildings, because the preservation cost was spent from the Japanese Government General of Korea's budget for investigation expenses of historical remains or repair expenses of Jeolleung and ruins, they were classified into preservation cost constructions. As for private buildings, the cost was spent from their budget for aiding preservation expenses, so they were classified into preservation cost-aided constructions. Because preservation cost construction and preservation cost-aided construction were conducted by two different agents, there were a little difference in procedures for executing a construction. There was no big difference in the general progress of constructions but was an administrative difference in the kinds of documents submitted and the roles of field supervisors. Such dual systems remained unimproved throughout the Japanese colonial era. The Japanese Government General of Korea was the colonial government so much influenced by the Japanese Government. Most Japanese architectural heritage was owned by Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines and there was almost no building owned by the government, resulting in a unitary system unlike Korea. Heritage system by the Japanese Government General of Korea was established under the influence of Japan regardless of the situation in Korea. Accordingly, Japanese Government General of Korea could not present a definite solution in the bisected system of preservation and repair expenses for the heritage. It shows the limits of the Japanese Government General of Korea in the colonial era.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.78-103
• /
• 2019

The Conservation Decree of the Chosun Treasures Historic and Natural Monuments (hereinafter referred to as the Conservation Decree), which was enacted during the Japanese colonial period, was preserved in accordance with the provisions of article No. 100 of the constitutional law. However, legislative attempts were made to replace the Conservation Decree during the US military administration and early Korean Government. The first attempt was about the National Treasures Historic and Natural Monuments which were brought in by the Legislative Assembly of South Chosun (1947) during the US military administration. The second was a bill by the government for preservation of historical interests (1950), which was submitted to the National Assembly on March 15, 1950 (the so-called Preservation Act (1950)). These two bills were amended and supplemented on the basis of the existing contents of the Conservation Decree. Afterwards, from 1952 to 1960, the legislation of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (1959) and the Cultural Heritage Bill (1960) were subsequently introduced and enacted. The government's attempt to enact such a cultural property bill was aimed at the legislature to replace the preservation order system that had been in effect since the Japanese colonial period. However, due to the political situation at the time, these laws did not reach final legislation. In October 1960, the government enacted the Regulations for the Preservation of Cultural Property, which was an administrative edict that was promulgated and enacted in November. This was the first official cultural property decree introduced by the Korean government. With the enactment and promulgation of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in January 1962, Korea's judicial cultural property legislation was established, based on the Korean government's unremitting efforts and experience in legislation of cultural property. In that context, the Cultural Heritage Protection Act is a historical product. The Cultural Heritage Protection Act, which was enacted in 1962, is known to emulate or transplant Japan's Cultural Heritage Protection Act (1950). It was not fully recognized that it was an extension of the Korean government's legislative process of cultural property during the period of 1945-1960. Therefore, it is important to examine the legislative process of cultural property from 1945 to 1960 to understand the background of enacting the Cultural Heritage Protection Act in 1962 along with the establishment of the Korean Cultural Property Law.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.120-128
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to establish basic data for the continuous protection management policy of domestic natural world heritage and mixed world heritage, and to examine the present situation and characteristics of the protection management according to the World Heritage Convention on the World Heritage listed Huangshan. The results of this study are as follows. First, Huangshan began to be protected by the establishment of the Huangshan Construction Committee in 1933, and after the designation of national park in 1982, laws and regulations were established in the central ministries, And various projects related to utilization have been implemented. Secondly, the establishment of the boundary for protection was actively intervened by the central government, such as the reorganization of the boundary of Huangshan through the administrative district plan. In order to protect the ecological and landscape value as well as the cultural factor, And designated a heritage designated area. Third, the protection management of Huangshan was divided into four major stages. The first phase was divided into the period when administrative measures were taken to manage the protection of Huangshan. The second phase was designated as a national park in Huangshan. The third period was the time of the protection-oriented project according to the recommendation of the international organizations after the World Heritage listed. The fourth period was the expansion of the tourism industry for the continuous use of protection of Huangshan city, My preservation business was being implemented. Fourth, Huangshan is managed by the central government and the city government. Huangshan, which is a mixed heritage, is managed jointly by the Ministry of Cultural Heritage Administration and the Ministry of Natural Heritage Administration. The protection and management of Huangshan promoted the efficiency and expertise of the heritage-related work through the establishment of the administrative unit-specific management system, and the local governments were entrusted with the authority to implement the protection management policies that meet local characteristics. Fifth, the preservation area of Huangshan has been destroyed by the development policy centered on the mountain. In addition, according to the operation of accommodation facilities, there are problems such as sewage, garbage disposal, and environmental pollution caused by tourists, and the damage caused by pests and diseases in planted plantations around the area and changes in ecosystem due to the composition of cable cars. Sixth, for the continuous protection of Huangshan, strict regulations on new construction, extension and management of accommodation are required, and it is necessary to install facilities to limit and control the number of visitors.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.337-374
• /
• 2024

Designating and registering cultural heritages are actions taken to effectively preserve and utilize something's value as a form of cultural heritage. It is the designation and registration of cultural heritage that establishes a legal basis for preservation and utilization. The preservation and utilization of cultural heritage starts with recognizing a given object, entity, or idea's value as a form of cultural heritage. Protecting and utilizing these forms of heritage properly can only occurs after something is recognized as a form of cultural heritage. In light of this, new religions, given their relatively short histories, naturally have fewer sites or objects designated or registered forms of cultural heritage. They tend not to actively recognize the value of the heritage they have inherited. Cultural heritage can be appropriately preserved when we recognize that it has potential value cultural and historical that can be designated and registered in the future. Among the designated and registered forms of cultural heritage, those associated with religious culture account for a large proportion; however, most of these are Buddhist. Since new religions have also been around for over 50 or even 100 years in some cases, they should have a foundation to proactively protect various items, sites, and traditions that may be designated and registered in the future. Selecting and listing forms of cultural heritage to be protected, minimizes further change to instead focus on historical and cultural value. This process also involves preparing internal regulations within the religious community regarding the protection and promotion of research on cultural heritage values, preservation, and management of the selected example of cultural heritage. Furthermore, comprehensive management, including cultural heritage and its surrounding environment, are necessary requirements for this process. Although potentially valuable as forms cultural heritage, many have items and sites end up damaged or go missing before they have a chance to be designated and registered. Establishing a foundation for preserving and managing cultural heritage internally within religious communities is meaningful because it preemptively preserves that value even prior to formal designation and registration. Daesoon Jinrihoe's Yeoju Headquarters Temple Complex, houses objects that have obvious value as cultural heritage such as Cheonggye-tap Pagoda. This pagoda and other comparable items at the headquarters should be properly and preemptively preserved in light of their cultural value.

• 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.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.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.49
• /
• pp.77-119
• /
• 2016

A modern architectural building is a cultural heritage, which is also part of our history until the present. Documentation is thus considered an irreplaceable method to preserve our cultural heritage as it may be the last resort of preservation. The study analyzed the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) on the Heritage Documentation Programs of the National Park Service. Based on the analysis of the comparison and documentation of the modern architectural building implemented by the Cultural Heritage Administration, the study suggested improvement plans from three different perspectives. First, specifically detailed regulations of the legal system are supposed to be used for the implementation of the documentation of modern architectural buildings. Second, it is suggested that a general plan for continuous documentation be made. Last, by setting up a collection method, an information service needs to be provided for the public.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.50 no.2
• /
• pp.62-79
• /
• 2017

The principle of repairing the architectural heritage in China was first presented by Liangsicheng of Society for Research in Chinese Architecture in the 1930s, and it was stated as "Restoration of Historic Condition or Preservation of Existing Condition" in 1961 in the "Provisional Regulations on the Protection and Management of Cultural Relics" after various repair experiences under the social and political background of the 1950s. Restoration of historic condition generally means restoration to original shape, and because architectural heritage was often repaired based on similar principle in Korea and Japan in the early and mid 20th century, it can be said that the restoration of historic condition was a universal and leading principle in this period in Northeast Asia. In China, however, the preservation of existing condition is equally specified along with the restoration of historic condition. When considering the leading trend of the time, it seems to be rather unexpected, which leads to questions about the formation process and meaning. The research on Liangsicheng, which first suggested the principle of repair, is very important, but there is a lack of three-dimensional analysis of his principles compared with active research on international principles in China. In order to understand the process of formation and its meaning of the principle of repair in China, we first need to analyze the principle proposed by Liangsicheng, and it is necessary to comprehensively examine how the principle have changed under the social background surrounding architectural heritage conservation after the founding of the People's Republic of China(PRC). In this paper, we first show that Liangsicheng has proposed a principle of restoration of historic condition with important values in the originality, and at the same time he opened the possibility of preservation of existing condition for the result of value judgment or realistic reason. In addition, we examine the process of equalizing preservation of existing condition with a restoration of historic condition as a realistic principle due to the influence of Soviet architectural heritage conservation system and Chinese economic development oriented policy after the founding of PRC.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.1
• /
• pp.65-73
• /
• 2022

This paper analyzed the characteristics of ancient villages in Hongcun and the method of resetting the preservation area for the preservation of the changed historical and cultural space in Hongcun through the process of change. To this end, the current status of preservation areas and utilization areas in the village was identified through ancient documents, old paintings, policy materials, and interviews related to the village, and through this, the problem of resetting the preservation area was examined. As a result, the following conclusions were drawn. First, Hongcun is a village built under the influence of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, and the spatial organization was created according to the hierarchy of Confucianism. As a result, it was possible to inherit and preserve the heritage of ancestors even though the central government did not preserve it. Second, the concept of preservation in a limited sense has been applied as Hongcun has been recognized as a cultural heritage that has been passed down since ancient times, but the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution brought about changes in the village space. Since then, ancient buildings, water systems, and forests have been preserved through regulations on new construction and expansion of a building with the Hongchon preservation plan, but the development within the preservation area is underway due to changes in the lives of original inhabitants, which were followed by continued development pressure and reform and opening. Third, the original inhabitant of ancient villages had a high perception of the value of the heritage, but they demanded the preparation of measures to improve living conditions and create profits, and the active use of villages for this. Fourth, the forest consisting of old trees is being restored, but the gardens in the old house are showing a phenomenon that the garden space is reduced or transformed for use. The bridges and parking lots were newly built in the southern area, which was extended from the western area, the original entrance to the ancient village, resulting in changes in the existing entrance. This was found to be the primary cause of the spatial change of the ancient village, as the road system was modified to make it convenient for tourists to enter and exit. Fifth, the existing preservation area should be reset and preserved by resetting the preservation route centered on Wolso(half Moon Pool), while the surrounding area should be set as a direct and indirect experience space, and according to the hierarchy of each space, the utilization should proceed while the preservation is carried out by crossing the preservation and the utilization.