• 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.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.575-588
• /
• 2013

The concept of cultural landscape, which is defined in the World Heritage Convention, provides a new framework with which to manage the heritage sites. European Landscape Convention proposes that landscape is the basic component of natural and cultural heritage, which in turn contributes to the improvement of human well-being and consolidation of the European identity. While recognizing the international trend, Japan has strived to improve the level of managing and protecting the landscape and cultural landscape through the enactment of Landscape Law and the revision of Cultural Property Protection Law. Now that landscape and cultural landscape has occupied the core of heritage management in the advanced countries, it is required more than ever that the concept of landscape and cultural landscape should be clarified through the legislation and convention in Korea. If the legislation for protecting and managing the landscape and cultural landscape is prerequisite for Korea to be an advanced country, a careful and in-depth examination, along with the consideration of the Korean circumstances, should be further carried out on the international experiences about the legislation from the comparative perspective.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.50 no.2
• /
• pp.26-39
• /
• 2017

Natural monument system was originally developed as an environmental movement and introduced in Korea during Japanese Colonization. Korea, Japan and Germany are the countries that have the natural monument systems. They are controlled by the Cultural Properties Protection Law in Korea and Japan but by the law of the protection of natural environment in Germany. For that reason the progress of the law and policy directions are similar between Japan and Korea. The natural monument system of Korea has been in use since 1930s, but the values and conditions of natural monument systems have changed over time. In terms of contents, these days cultural identity involved are getting more important than the natural scenic and ecological values, or rarity of plants. Also it's a trend to expand the preserved area around cultural properties which have been preserved on individual basis before. Finally it is necessary to discover and manage the registered cultural properties as potential designated cultural properties by creating the registration standard for natural heritage.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.36
• /
• pp.39-67
• /
• 2003

In this paper we examine cultural properties of the North Korea from 'the law of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on Protection of Cultural Property". This law was adopted the Resolution of the Standing Committee of the Supreme People's Assembly of DPR of Korea in 1994. For our study, some other laws or rules established after the end of Japanese colonial occupation (1910-1945) in North Korea were examined. The policy on protection and conservation of cultural property in North Korea seems to have taken place a relatively rapid. The purpose of this law is to carry out the policy with a view to contributing to establishment of strict system and order for protection and management of cultural property, to their preservation in original state, to their proper inheritance and development, and to enhancement of national pride and confidence among the people. This law consists of 6 chapters (52 articles): (1) Fundamentals of the law on protection of cultural property, (2) Archaeological excavation and collection of cultural relics, (3) Evaluation and registration of cultural property, (4) Preservation and management of cultural property, (5) Restoration of cultural property, and (6) Guidance and control of cultural property protection. Nevertheless, it is difficult to find the evidence of efforts to exploit the cultural properties from an academic point of view in North Korea since the late 1980s.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.127-133
• /
• 2019

This study intends to discuss the system improvement of landscape architecture field in the cultural heritage protection system, which is changing continuously. The results are as follows. First, the status of landscape architecture in cultural heritage, including natural monuments and scenic sites, must be defined. If possible, careful consideration should be given to establish the natural monuments law and scenic sites law, respectively, related to landscape architecture. Second, natural heritage must be preserved by focusing on "space" to include cultural artifacts and landscapes that may be missing through the method of "object" focused protection. Institutionally, the scope of work should be clearly shared by reviewing the redundancy and interrelationship of related laws. Third, in order to protect and manage natural heritage, a department that is wholly responsible for landscape architecture should be established independently at the Cultural Heritage Administration. Fourth, the landscape architecture field should be specified as the requirements for the commissioner of commission at the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. In addition, it is necessary to improve the system such as expending the roles of the repairing technician for landscape architecture and plants in the Cultural Heritage Protection Act.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.4
• /
• pp.218-227
• /
• 2016

Protected Flora are natural heritage that involve a wide variety of valuable natural values and cultural values. Over time, "Cultural Properties Preservation Law" has been changing the definition and the criteria of Protected Flora. In addition to the academic value and the rarity of the plant, historical, ethnic and landscape values have become increasingly important. For that reason the declaration and management processes of the Protected Flora need to be improved. However, the current statute has focused on the morphological characteristics of the plants which have a limit to encompass various values of the plant. It also does not correspond to the definition of Protected Flora and its declaration criteria stated on the "Cultural Properties Preservation Law." For this reason, the main purpose of this study is to develop new types of Protected Flora so that various Protected Flora can be discovered in the future.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.34-43
• /
• 2022

This study compared the characteristics of cultural heritage in China and Vietnam, which have developed in the relationship of mutual geopolitical and cultural influence in history, and the following conclusions were made. First, the definition of cultural heritage in China and Vietnam has similar meanings in both countries. In the case of cultural heritage classification, both countries introduced the legal concept of intangible cultural heritage through UNESCO, and have similarities in terms of intangible cultural heritage. Second, while China has separate laws for managing tangible and intangible cultural heritages, Vietnam integrally manages the two types of cultural heritages under a single law. Vietnam has a slower introduction of the concept of cultural heritage than China, but it shows high integration in terms of system. Third, cultural heritages in both China and Vietnam are graded, which is applied differently depending on the type of heritage. The designation method has a similarity in which the two countries have a vertical structure and pass through steps. By restoring the value of heritage and complementing integrity through such a step-by-step review, balanced development across the country is being sought through tourism to enjoy heritage and create economic effects. Fourth, it was confirmed that the cultural heritage management organization has a central government management agency in both countries, but in China, the authority of local governments is higher than that of Vietnam. In addition, unlike Vietnam, where tangible and intangible cultural heritage are managed by an integrated institution, China had a separate institution in charge of intangible cultural heritage. Fifth, China is establishing a conservation management policy focusing on sustainability that harmonizes the protection and utilization of heritage. Vietnam is making efforts to integrate the contents and spirit of the agreement into laws, programs, and projects related to cultural heritage, especially intangible heritage and economic and social as a whole. However, it is still dependent on the influence of international organizations. Sixth, China and Vietnam are now paying attention to intangible heritage recently introduced, breaking away from the cultural heritage protection policy centered on tangible heritage. In addition, they aim to unite the people through cultural heritage and achieve the nation's unified policy goals. The two countries need to use intangible heritage as an efficient means of preserving local communities or regions. A cultural heritage preservation network should be established for each subject that can integrate the components of intangible heritage into one unit to lay the foundation for the enjoyment of the people. This study has limitations as a research stage comparing the cultural heritage system and preservation management status in China and Vietnam, and the characteristic comparison of cultural heritage policies by type remains a future research task.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.51 no.2
• /
• pp.38-57
• /
• 2018

Led by the Cultural Heritage Administration, studies on the cultural heritage of railways have merely focused on modern registered cultural heritage and on excavating the cultural heritage of modern rail transportation. Endeavors of institutions relevant to railways to protect the cultural heritage of railways were not sufficiently made. Only the internal guideline to protect the cultural heritage of railways made by the railway corporation is being implemented. This study aims to assert the need to examine the protective measures of the heritage of railroad cars and to vitalize plans of conserving the heritage of railroad cars. Also, plans to protect the heritage of railroad cars and methods to invigorate schemes of protecting the heritage of railroad cars will be suggested. The current situation of protecting the heritage of railroad cars was investigated via a field trip. Through exploring overseas examples of protecting the heritage of the railroad cars, ways to vitalize plans of widely publicizing the heritage of the railroad cars with their historical values were suggested. Results showed that first, the way of openly exhibiting conserved railroad cars by setting up stands other than the way of exhibiting and conserving in one site was necessary. Second, in order to properly preserve and manage the cultural heritage of railways, railroad cars, much like natural monuments or intangible cultural properties, need to be perceived as cultural properties. Also, it is necessary to amend the Cultural Properties Protection Law to include railway heritage. Third, the perception of the cultural heritage of railways should be heightened, and SNS, blogs, and cafes need to strategically promote this heritage in order to increase the public's interest. Fourth, in addition to enacting legislations and gaining institutional support for the cultural heritage of railways, the budget to operate the responsible department, and employing staff for the heritage of railroad cars should be resolved as a priority in order to enhance the capability of managing this cultural heritage. In order to rationally protect the cultural heritage of railways and invigorate plans to protect the cultural heritage of railways, it is necessary to garner administrative and financial support, and enact the appropriate legislation. The heritage of railroad cars is priceless and has a social value in terms of regional icons, historic marks, and the record of life. It is considered that in this situation, the standard of amending both policy and the Cultural Properties Protection Law for the heritage of railroad cars should be urgently established.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.56 no.2
• /
• pp.282-294
• /
• 2023

Efforts are being made internationally to pay attention to the landscape value of modern and contemporary heritage and to pass it on. However, in Korea, the registration of modern and contemporary landscape heritage as registered cultural properties is insignificant. There has also been little discussion on ways to improve the system in this regard. This study sought ways to improve the registration criteria and classification system of the registered cultural property system so that modern and contemporary landscaping heritage could be protected. Currently, the registration criteria for registered cultural properties are not stipulated for each type of heritage, but are stipulated as a single comprehensive standard. Registration criteria should be separately prepared so that the landscape value of the heritage can be reviewed. First, the registration criteria have an important value in understanding the development of landscape culture. Second, well-preserved landscaping reflects or characterizes the times. Lastly, it should be defined as related to the works of major artists or important figures or historical events. The classification system must match the studied building cultural property classification system, and the detailed types of modern and contemporary landscape heritage should be specified. The major classification follows the building cultural property classification system, but parks and green spaces, squares, and gardens, which can be called a single landscape heritage, should be added to the middle classification. Landscaping heritage, such as gardens combined with building heritage, shall be specified in the subcategory based on building use.