• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.421-474
• /
• 2005

The Cultural Heritage Committee is an advisory committee established under the Cultural Heritage Administration with the aim of carrying out examination and deliberation on preservation, management and use of cultural properties. The Cultural Heritage Administration is responsible for Korean cultural properties. It was found to produce and execute policies on cultural properties, which involves in-depth investigation and consultation of experts in the fields of cultural properties. In here the Cultural Heritage Committee plays an important role in policy-making on Korean cultural properties. Governmental committees in Korea are largely divided into consultation committees and administrative commissions. Consultation committees are subdivided into consultation, deliberation and legislative committees. The Korean government established the Bureau of Cultural Properties in October 1961, and enacted provisions (as a presidential decree) on March 27, 1962, by the Cultural Properties Act, January 10, 1962. The Cultural Heritage Committee was opened as a deliberation committee which covers the entirety of cultural properties, including designation and cancellation of cultural properties, on which currently 120 members serve in 9 subcommittees. The committee member hold two years membership. This analysis contains a frame and scheme of the committee, function and statue of the current operation and study on role of a deliberation committee.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.51 no.1
• /
• pp.100-125
• /
• 2018

The Japanese colonial authority investigated and institutionalized Korea's cultural properties for the purpose of governance. This process was conducted by Japanese officials and scholars, and systematized after making some changes. The Reservation Rule (1916) and the cultural properties designated in 1934 were actually the starting point for Korea's current cultural property policy. In the view of lineup of 'committee' that consider all of cultural property and changing of 'cultural property list', this study discusses the cultural property policy implemented by Joseon's Government-General, which can be summarized as follows. First, Joseon's Government-General formed a committee (Preservation Society) to formulate the cultural property policy, and had the policy implemented by appointing Governor officials who accounted for more than half the total number of officials of the institution. Although some Koreans were concerned about this, they had no influence on the matter. Second, the cultural properties listed by Joseon's Government-General are divided into three periods according to the lists. The compilation of the first list was led by Sekino Tadashi, who represented the grading system (1909~1916); while that of the second list (1917~1933) was led by Guroita Gatsumi, who represented listing (1917~1933). Guroita Gatsumi tried to erase Sekino Tadashi's list by formulating the cultural property policy and the list - a situation that was revealed in the system and the actual contents of the list. The third list was made as a list of designated cultural properties in 1934. This list also reflected the results of Sekino Tadashi investigation of the important cultural properties at existing temples that had been excluded from the previous regulations (1934~1945). In this way, a basic framework for the listing of Korean cultural properties was established in 1934.

• 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.

• 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.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.

• 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.

• Journal of Conservation Science
• /
• v.4 no.1 s.4
• /
• pp.53-58
• /
• 1995

In order to establish the procedures for investigating environmental influences to wooden cultural property, existing study data were surveyed and necessary steps for performing the investigation works were presented to be applied for the future works in this country. Environmental factors which influence to the conservation of wooden cultural property should first be studied for items concerned with their damage situations. On basis of these data, laboratory works to yield the standard value for each factor should be conducted by means of testing samples exposed under laboratory simulated environmental conditions. Outdoor measurements may be followed for samples exposed to the open air at the site of that property. These data may be compared with those of laboratory standard value and overall evaluation for the factor influencing mostly tn the damage status of that property may further be conducted. Referring data obtained in this investigation, necessary measures to be taken for conserving that property may be able to be established.

• Journal of Conservation Science
• /
• v.5 no.2 s.6
• /
• pp.65-79
• /
• 1996

Works on biodeterioration performed at domestic museums were surveyed through questionary data made by each museum to find fumigation practices conducted at around twenty domestic museums and to review relevant activities of each museum concerned. Through reported data in literatures, major works on biodeterioration done at some international museums (Two in Japan, three in N. America, four in Europe, and five in 5. East Asian Region) were reviewed to characterize and evaluate features of the work performed at each museum and relevant activities at these museums were also Introduced in details.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.9 no.2 s.23
• /
• pp.101-116
• /
• 2000

Many cultural heritages for the modern ages in Korea are becoming lost rapidly as a result of subsequent technological innovation and changes in industrial structures and other reasons. But they are indispensable for an understanding of history, tradition culture of Korea, and form the basis for development and advancement of future culture at the same time. Therefore, this study is aimed to review the protection of cultural heritage in Japan, establishing the protection policies in Korea. In Japan, The Advisory Committee for the Preservation and Utilization of Modern Cultural heritage was organized by The Agency for Cultural Affairs. And this classified modern cultural heritage into four fields, as like; (1)monuments, (2)buildings, (3)fine arts and historical heritage, and (4)life, culture, and technology to pursue concrete research and study. The next step is tarrying out investigations to identify these cultural heritages, which were once the backbone of Japanese modernization and are now in the process of being lost, in an effort to preserve them as cultural heritage of the Japanese modernization period. The investigation will have conducted on an about eight year scheme starting with 1996. And it's will ask all local boards of education(of the prefectures, cities, towns, and villages throughout the country) to supply all related records or documents available and to cooperate in field studies. So now, many cultural heritages for the modern ages in Japan have been designated as Important Cultural Properties, Registered Tangible Cultural Properties, Monuments, etc. And they have been prepared various tax policy(ex, reduction of the real estate tax). Also, that's examples are not only one by one but magnified with protection of large-scale construction associated with region. In addition, magnified with region's activities. In conclusion, in the process, protection has been extended to a broader variety of cultural properties and much consideration has been given to the methods of protection in Japan.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.22-30
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study of deliberation results to Change the Present Condition of Gyeonggi-do Designated Cultural Properties established Acceptable Standards of Change the Present and its disposal of the fire, Accordingly to minimize the complaints of neighbors cultural property and Decision of Change the Present Condition to maintain the consistency of that is the purpose of this study and The results of the study are as follows First, 82 of proposals with tangible cultural monuments and 56% and 50% each accounted for the majority. 84% of the individual applicant, the application uses 94% of the construction, application facility houses the highest percentage of 40%. Approved and reconsideration results, while the largest number of monuments, rejected the result was the most frequent types of cultural property. and Building height, the highest was filed. Second, the results of deliberation voted two of the most frequently voted 36.5% to 48.7%, 14.6% is the reconsideration. The main reason for the decision passed Cultural minimal impact surrounding landscape, and the application of the buildings surrounding the site have voted in determining the existence of many affected. The main reason for rejection of the decision and voted to determine the cultural assets, compared to inhibition surrounding area of application architecture is characterized by large-scale. The main reason for reconsideration of the decision after a site survey was the most frequent reconsideration. Third, the primary consideration only if you applied a full half of 82 is 47.5% of cases. Consequences of the two manatgo voted the same, assuming the number of agenda items, the more the decision was rejected, and reconsideration. Fourth, the application area committee areas and cultural phenomenon in the conservation area be applied to each 33.7% and 20.2% was most common. Compared with rejection and reconsideration if the various sections of the application has passed. and When applied to the conservation area there were passed. Cultural committee rejected the decision, if applied to areas were most prevalent, reconsideration of the decision was similar in the two areas. Fifth, the size of the construction of buildings collapsed as a result, you voted in rejection have changed. and Voted to reject the results from the increase in building area when changing a lot of decisions have affected the results.