• 제목/요약/키워드: National Police

검색결과 794건 처리시간 0.021초

조선전기 군례(軍禮)의 정비와 사례(射禮)의 의례화 (A study on the Ritualized of Royal Archery of early Chosun Dynasty)

  • 이왕무
    • 동양고전연구
    • /
    • 제54호
    • /
    • pp.319-348
    • /
    • 2014
  • 이 논문은 조선시대의 군례(軍禮)가 중국 고대의 의례를 답습한 것만이 아니라 삼국시대와 고려를 이어 내려오던 전례도 함께 수용되었음을 밝혔으며, 그 대표적인 사례로 사례(射禮)를 들어서 군례의 역사적인 정착과 의례화 과정을 살펴보았다. 조선의 군례는 국가의례인 오례의가 정착되는 성종대에 정비되었다. 군례가 국가 전례서에 공식적으로 오례의 하나로 포함되면서 군사의례가 완비되었다. 그러나 군례의 정비는 중국 고대의 예제와 고려시대까지 이어졌던 전통적인 부분을 흡수하는 선에서 이루어졌다. 예컨대 중국의 예제는 "주례"의 오례 구조를 계승하였던 당대의 "개원례"를 도입하였으며, 삼국시대의 예제를 계승한 고려의 오례 구도를 이었다. 따라서 조선시대 군례의 기원은 고려시대는 물론 삼국시대와 주나라 및 당 송에까지 거슬러 올라갈 수 있으며, 그런 오랜 기간을 통해 정비되고 개선된 의례 형식이 가미되어 정착되었던 것이다. 또한 조선의 군례에 활쏘기가 들어간 것은 조선왕조에서만 볼 수 있는 독특한 특징이었다. 조선초부터 활쏘기는 왕실은 물론 관료들 사이에서 일상적으로 이루어졌다. 유교적 관점에서 활쏘기가 군자의 덕을 살필 수 있는 의례였다는 점이 크게 작용한 부분도 있으며, 태조를 이은 국왕들이 왕실내 전통적인 행사로 활쏘기를 이어간 것도 한 요인이었다. 활쏘기가 습사(習射)와 관사(觀射)로 정비되면서 점차 의례적인 절차로 규정되었으며 결국 세종대 오례의에 포함되고 성종대 의례로 정비되었다. 습사와 관사는 사례의(射禮儀)로 정비된 이후에도 의례적인 시행만이 아니라 국왕들의 잦은 활쏘기에 맞추어 활발하게 거행되었다. 다만 성종대 성균관 대사례가 정비된 이후 왕실의 활쏘기는 축소되었다. 특히 중종대 이후에는 국가적인 사례의 거행이 드물게 되었으며, 국왕이 활쏘기를 장려하는 것도 조선초에 비하면 상대적으로 크게 감소되었다. 이점은 중종대를 전후하여 문치를 강조하던 사림파의 정계 진출 이후 벌어진 일이라고 보인다. 중종 재위기간 내 국왕이 주재하는 활쏘기가 2회만 거행되었다는 점이 그 반증이라고 할 수 있다. 이렇게 국초부터 왕실의 장기이며 상무기질을 북돋기에 가장 용이한 방안이었던 사례(射禮)가 쇠퇴했다는 것은 국가적으로 군례를 소홀히 다루기 시작했음을 보여주는 사례일 것이다. 따라서 조선초 군례의 정착과 사례의 정비는 상무적 기상이 강조되었던 시기를 기준으로 해서 그 변화양상을 보는 것도 좋을 것이다. 실제로 중종대 이후 잦은 왜변을 거치면서 상무적인 군례의 시행이나 활쏘기는 권장되지 않았다. 오히려 왜란을 거친 뒤 새로 도입된 명나라의 군제에 맞추어 군례가 변화되고 새롭게 정비되는 과정에서 무예가 강조되었다. 결국 조선전기의 군례는 그 정착 과정이 국가의례적 속성을 보이면서도 시대적 변화에 따라 다분히 의례적(依例的)인 수준으로 변모되었음을 시사해 준다. 또한 이점이 왜란과 호란을 겪게 될 조선의 딜레마였음은 물론이다.

발화열원에 따른 화재발생 특성 분석 (Analysis of Fire Occurrence Characteristics According to Ignition Heat Sources)

  • 이경수;김태형;이재오
    • 한국재난정보학회 논문집
    • /
    • 제18권2호
    • /
    • pp.280-289
    • /
    • 2022
  • 연구목적: 본 연구에서는 발화열원을 작동기기, 담뱃불·라이터불, 불꽃·불티 등 발화열원에 따른 화재 발생의 특징을 알아보고자 하였다. 연구방법: 일원배치 분산분석과 교차분석을 이용하여 발화열원에 따른 발화환경, 화재피해 현황 및 규모, 발화원인과의 차이 검증을 통해 화재발생 특성을 분석하였다. 연구결과: 작동기기에 의해 발생한 화재는 다른 발화열원에 비해 평일에 발생 빈도가 높고, 이재세대수와 이재민 발생이 가장 많아 소방력 동원과 재산피해가 가장 큰 것으로 나타났다. 최초착화물은 전기·전자기기에 의해 발생되었으며, 합성수지에 의해 연소가 확대되는 특징을 보였다. 담뱃불·라이터불에 의해 발생하는 화재는 토·일요일에 화재가 가장 많이 발생되었으며, 소방력 동원보다는 경찰력 동원이 많은 특징을 보였다. 특히, 최초착화물과 연소확대물은 종이·목재·건초에 의해 발생하는 것으로 나타났다. 불꽃·불티에 의해 발생하는 화재는 토·일요일에 화재가 가장 많이 발생되었으며, 최초착화물과 연소확대물은 종이·목재·건초에 의해 발생하는 것으로 나타났다. 특히, 소방서와의 거리가 가장 먼 곳에서 발생하고 있는 특징을 보였다. 모든 발화열원에서의 공통적인 특징은 오후시간대에 화재가 가장 많았으며, 화재유형은 건축구조물화재가 지배적이었고 발화지점만 연소되는 경우가 가장 많은 것으로 나타났다. 결론: 대형 화재가 발생하게 될 확률은 높아지고 있기 때문에 화재 예방 및 피해를 최소화 하기 위해서는 화재 발생 경향을 분석하고 화재발생 요인에 따른 적절한 대비를 해야 한다. 향후 공공데이터를 이용한 화재발생 특성 분석을 위해서는 재난 데이터의 표준화와, 데이터 개방 및 활성화가 필요하다.

해양 선박재난 대응을 위한 거버넌스 법제 연구 (Study on Governance Legislation for Responses to Maritime Ship Disasters)

  • 방호삼;하민재
    • 해양환경안전학회지
    • /
    • 제28권2호
    • /
    • pp.334-345
    • /
    • 2022
  • 「재난 및 안전관리 기본법」시행령 제3조의2에 따르면, 현행 해양사고 주관기관이 이원화되어 있다. 해양사고 주관기관이 사고 현장대응기관인 해경과 정부 부처인 해양수산부로 나뉘어져 있어 혼선이 일어날 여지가 있다. 대규모 해양사고 대응에서는 전권을 가진 전문성 있는 인사를 선임하고 권한과 책임의 명확화, 주도-지원 관계 설정의 명확화 그리고 지휘체계의 단순화를 보장한다면 효율적인 선박재난 대응이 이루어질 수 있다. 해양 선박재난 관리에서 예방-대비-대응-복구의 모든 단계가 유기적이며 일관성 있게 추진되는 것이 바람직하다. 재난상황에서 신속하고 효율적인 대응을 위해 의사결정과 지휘체계를 단순화하는 것은 중요하다. 또한 지휘체계의 구축과 의사결정이 전문성에 기반하고 독립적으로 이루어지도록 하는 것도 중요하다. 미국의 경우에는 재난의 양태와 무관하게 연방재난관리청에서 주관하고, 해안경비대(USCG)에서 ICS(Incident Command System) 혹은 UC (Unified Command) 사고관리체계를 근간으로 사령탑을 구성하면서 대응한다. 영국은 해양경비청(MCA)에서 연안경비대(HMCG)를 지휘하며 해양재난대응을 하며, 선박구난관리대표부(SOSREP)라는 해양재난의 지휘·조정 역할을 독립적으로 수행할 수 있는 전권을 가진 직책을 두고 있다. 이러한 제도를 두는 것은 유관기관들 간의 대립 등으로 재난대응이 비효율적으로 흐르는 것을 막고자 하는 취지도 있다. 우리나라도 사례로 든 외국의 경우처럼 해양선박재난대응의 표준화 및 단순화를 추구해야 한다. 이 연구에서는 새로운 대응제도에 대한 검토와 함께 법률(안) 제시가 이루어질 것이다.

한국전쟁의 교훈과 대비 -병력수(兵力數) 및 부대수(部隊數)를 중심으로- (The lesson From Korean War)

  • 윤일영
    • 안보군사학연구
    • /
    • 통권8호
    • /
    • pp.49-168
    • /
    • 2010
  • Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.

  • PDF