• 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.

• 헤리티지:역사와 과학
• /
• 제52권1호
• /
• pp.216-241
• /
• 2019

현재까지 알려진 비무장지대(Demilitarized Zone : DMZ) 내의 문화재는 14종 35개소이지만 앞으로 더 증가될 것으로 보인다. 그중에서도 지하에 묻혀있는 철원도성(鐵原都城)과 김화 병자호란 전골총(戰骨塚)은 남과 북이 공동조사를 실시하여 그 실체를 밝히는 것이 보존방향의 첫걸음일 것이다. 특히 철원도성의 공동조사는 남북이 오랫동안 동일한 역사와 문화전통을 지녀온 같은 민족임을 일깨워줄 뿐만 아니라 비무장지대를 평화의 무대로 전환시키는 상징적 의미를 부여할 것이다. 김화의 전골총도 청(淸)의 침입에 대항하여 싸운 평안도 근왕군(謹王軍)의 전몰자 집단무덤인 만큼 남북의 공동조사를 통하여 그 위치와 규모 등을 확인하여 국가지정문화재로 관리해야 할 것이다. 또한 비무장지대는 이데올로기의 대립으로 인한 국제적 전쟁인 한국전쟁의 유산이라는 점에서 세계문화유산으로의 요건을 갖추고 있을 뿐만 아니라 100여종의 멸종위기종 및 천연기념물 외에도 6,000여종의 온대림을 갖고 있어 세계자연유산의 자격도 갖추고 있으므로 비무장지대를 유네스코 세계문화유산과 세계자연유산의 자격을 동시에 갖추고 있는 세계복합문화유산으로 등재할 수 있을 것이다. 그 외에도 비무장지대는 한국전 당시의 수많은 고지, 땅굴, 진지 등이 그대로 남아있을 뿐만 아니라 휴전협정으로 생긴 감시초소(GP), 군사분계선, 남북한 한계선 철조망, 판문점 등이 남아있어 그 일부구간과 전쟁시설을 선별하여 근대 문화재로 등록하는 것이 바람직할 것이다. 끝으로 도라산의 봉수지는 복원하여 남과 북이 평양-개성-도라산-서울을 잇는 전통시대의 통신시설을 필요시 재연하여 남북간의 원활한 소통을 상징적으로 보여주는 계기로 삼을 수 있을 것이다. 앞으로 다가올 종전으로 인한 비무장지대의 난개발에 대비하기 위하여 정부 및 문화재 전문가들은 비무장지대의 문화재 파악과 보전에 힘써야 할 것이며 무분별한 조사나 지뢰제거 등의 문제도 일관성 있게 통제를 해야 할 것이다.

• 한국조경학회지
• /
• 제49권5호
• /
• pp.97-111
• /
• 2021

본 연구는 유럽에 있는 미국, 영연방, 독일의 제2차 세계대전 전쟁묘지에 나타난 공간적 배치 및 구성, 기념적 요소, 묘역 및 묘비에 나타난 기념적 특성을 분석하고, 그 결과를 토대로 양식적, 정치적, 종교적 측면에서 기념문화를 고찰하였다. 연구 대상으로 각 나라별로 규모가 크고 고유한 양식적 특성을 보여주며, 장소적 의미가 있는 미국군 묘지 7개소, 영연방 묘지 3개소, 독일군 묘지 4개소 등 대표적인 전쟁 묘지 14개소를 선정하여, 현장조사, 문헌연구, 인터넷 조사를 통하여 자료를 수집하고, 분석 및 고찰을 하였으며, 연구의 주요 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 미국, 영연방, 독일군 묘지 모두 공간적 중심축을 강조하였고, 대칭적이며 방형, 원형, 나선형 등 정형적 형태를 취하고 있어 신고전주의적 양식을 보여주었다. 한편, 일부 미국군 묘지에서는 곡선 레이아웃 및 유기적 공간 구성을 한 근대주의적 형태가 나타났다. 둘째, 미국군 묘지에는 예배당, 실종자의 벽, 전투지도벽, 기념조각 등을 공통적 기념요소로 적용하였고, 영연방 묘지에서는 쉘터와 '희생의 십자가' 및 '기억의 돌' 등 고전주의 양식의 표준적인 기념 조형물이 도입되었다. 한편, 독일군 묘지는 분구묘와 공동묘지에 상징적 십자가 조형물을 설치하였고, 다른 기념 요소의 사용은 제한되었다. 셋째, 각 나라마다 기독교를 주제로 하는 십자가를 묘비의 주요한 형태적 모티브로 적용하였다. 미국은 라틴 십자가 묘비를 통하여 전사자를 추모하고, 동시에 순교자로서 미국의 희생과 기독교를 강조하였으며, 영연방과 독일은 기독교에 바탕을 두고 전사자의 영혼을 추모하였다. 마지막으로, 정치 및 종교적 측면에서 미국은 공산주의를 극복하는 기독교 및 자유민주주의와 국가적 애국심을 강하게 표현하였고, 영연방은 제국주의 공통된 양식으로 묘지를 조성하였으며, 독일은 집단적 죽음을 동료애로 표현하는 전통주의와 화해 및 평화를 지향하였다. 본 연구 결과는 서유럽에 있는 제2차 세계대전 전쟁묘지는 공간적 중심축과 정형적 공간 형태를 통하여 표준화되고 정형화된 묘지의 미학을 추구하면서, 국가별로 공간 설계, 상징적 기념요소의 도입, 종교 및 이념적 가치에서 고유한 기념문화적 특성을 보여주고 있다는 것을 시사하고 있다. 향후, 우리나라의 현충원 및 호국원 등 묘지에서 담아야 하는 숭고한 기념성과 국립묘지를 발전시키고, 기념문화를 정립하기 위한 연구가 필요하다.

• 대순사상논총
• /
• 제39집
• /
• pp.137-174
• /
• 2021

통일 시기에 대순진리회 3대 중요사업인 구호자선·사회복지·제반 교육사업을 어떻게 추진할 것인가가 이 논문의 핵심 주제다. 3대 중요사업은 통일 이후에도 반드시 추진되어야 하는바, 해원상생사상의 실천에 기반하기 때문이다. 해원상생의 인존사상은 유엔헌장의 서문과 세계평화를 지향한다는 점에서 일맥상통하다. 북한의 주민은 피폐된 경제 하에서 기아에 허덕이고 있는데 통일 시기 의식주의 위기를 맞이할 것이 분명하다. 본 연구에서는 3대 중요사업의 추진 여건을 분석하기 위하여 독일의 평화통일, 예멘의 급변사태 통일, 베트남의 무력통일 사례를 진단하였다. 3가지 통일유형은 공통적으로 3대 중요사업을 수행하는데 상당한 예산과 지원을 소요케 하였는데, 특히, 급변사태 후 무력충돌과 무력통일 시에는 수많은 인명의 살상과 인프라의 파괴로 구호와 의료지원 등 의식주 문제 해결이 시급하였다. 한편, 3대 중요사업의 방안을 도출하기 위하여 유엔난민기구(UNHCR)의 모델을 분석하였는바, 정신력과 전문성을 갖춘 전문 인력의 확충, 복합적인 상황 대비 능력을 갖춘 표준적인 조직의 편성과 명확한 과업 부여, 충분한 구호물품과 예산 준비, 접경지역과 북한지역의 거점 확보, 물류 창고와 수송수단 확보, 후원금 수급을 위한 네트워크 구축 등의 시사점을 도출하였다. 이를 바탕으로 통일시기와 북한지역 상황을 고려하여 통일대비 3대 중요사업의 체계구축 분야 세부과제 8개 항과 실행대비 검토과제 9개 항을 제시하였다. 결론적으로 통일시기 3대 중요사업은 그 당위성 측면에서 소홀함이 없어야 하며, '통일시기 3대 중요사업 추진방안' 제하의 매뉴얼에 3대 중요사업 추진의의, 조직 구성 및 임무, 통일시기 예상 상황, 전진기지 및 거점 운용, 경비 및 물류 준비, 파견팀 편성 및 운용, 홍보 및 대외협력, 전문 인력 양성, 안전조치, 수송 및 연락체계 등이 포함되어야 할 것이다.

• 대순사상논총
• /
• 제39집
• /
• pp.69-97
• /
• 2021

'해체(解體, déconstruction)'는 현대철학을 특징짓는 속성의 하나인 창발성(創發性, emergent property)을 유도하는 개념이다. 고대 그리스 철학의 전통이 탈피를 거듭하여 개체의 자유와 평등에 대한 열망을 낳고 이로부터 르네상스와 계몽주의에 이르러 근대라는 역사적 방점 하에 철학의 종지부를 찍는 듯했다. 하지만 철학은 근대마저도 그러한 해체를 통해 그 이상의 가능성을 바라보고자 했다. 근대철학이 플라톤 철학의 인문적 완성으로 신과 인간의 묘한 동거를 꿈꾼다면 현대철학은 해체를 통해 그마저도 거부한다. 플라톤류의 고전적 형이상학은 절대자를 중심으로 순치된 안정된 체계이기는 하지만 결과적으로는 신과 종교를 토대로 할 수밖에 없고 인간의 자율성 또한 신 아래의 자율성일 뿐이다. 현대철학은 해체를 통해 인간 본연의 목소리로부터 철학을 시작하고자 한 노력의 결과 가운데 하나이다. 형이상학에 종속된 인식론이 아닌 인간 실존으로부터의 인식론을 구축하고 자유라는 말이 가질 수 있는 최고의 선을 해체를 통해 실현하고자 했다. 그렇듯 해체 또한 인간의 자유라는 근대적 화두의 연장선에 있다고 해도 틀리지 않다. 해체와 인간의 자유는 결국 서로 떼어낼 수 없는 하나의 몸인 것이다. 묘하게도 종교적 신앙성과 전통적 보수성을 주된 색채로 할 것만 같은 대순사상은 현대적 창발성을 가지고 있다. 대순사상을 창시한 증산이 활동하던 한국의 시기는 역사를 해석하는 예리한 시각이 있는 이들에게는 보물과 같이 중요한 의미를 가진다. 외세에 의한 답습이 아닌 주체적 문제의식 가운데 새로운 세상과 인간의 자유의 의미를 발견하려는 강렬한 염원에 의한 사상적 활동이 펼쳐진 시기이기 때문이다. 그러한 한국의 자생적 창발성이 낳은 비권력적 사상이 바로 흔히 말하는 한국 근대의 신종교인 셈이다. 그 가운데서 대순사상은 참동학으로서 증산의 명맥을 잇고 증산이 남긴 해원의 개념 속에서 근대를 넘은 현대의 가치를 현실 가운데 펼치고자 한다. 대순사상의 해원은 근대를 넘은 현대성을 담고 있다는 점에서 현대철학의 해체와 상통한다. 해원은 첫째로 단주로부터 발현된 인간 실존의 원초적 억압에 따른 근본 원(冤)의 해소를 의미한다. 두 번째로 대순사상의 해원은 인존이라는 해원적 실존을 중심으로 천지인 삼계의 해원을 아우른다. 데리다의 해체가 인간과 사회 내부에 잠재된 보이지 않는 구조와 속박의 틀을 드러내고 그것을 파기하는 것으로부터 억압을 풀고 인간의 근본 자유를 실현하고자 한 것은 대순사상의 해원이 천지인 삼계를 휘감고 있던 근본 억압을 풀어 삼계의 대립을 상생으로 개방하고자 한 점과 동일한 맥락이라고 할 수 있겠다.

• 대순사상논총
• /
• 제28집
• /
• pp.37-72
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 '천지공사(天地公事)'의 공공윤리 실천전망에 관한 연구를 목적으로 한다. 천지공사는 공적 영역과 사적 영역이 서로 이어지고 매개하는 공공작용을 통해 공공윤리 실천전망을 보여준다. 천지공사는 삼계 통래(通來)로 대순진리를 관철시키는 공사이다. 본 연구방법으로 천지공사가 소개된 문헌을 면밀히 분석하는 문헌연구와 공공윤리 전망을 모색하는 해석학적 기제를 함께 사용한다. 이는 공과 사를 이어주고 매개하는 '공사공매' 지표, 공공행복 추구의 '행복공창' 지표, 개체를 살려 공적 가치를 드러내는 '활사개공' 지표의 기제이다. 공공윤리 지표는 물질과 영혼, 초월과 내재, 성과 속 사이의 간극을 해소하는 능동성으로 말미암아 공공책임을 수반한다. 천지공사는 '음양합덕' 담론에서 시작하여 '신인조화(調化)'의 공공소통을 이루고 '해원상생'의 존재론적 축복으로 연결된다. 도통선경으로 상호호혜의 결실을 맺기에, 천지공사와 인존사사(人尊私事)는 공공의 성상원융(性相圓融)을 이루어 천지인삼재 일원상(一圓相)을 이룬다. 이러한 공공실천 전망은 감성·이성 상관연동의 소통의 공사공매, 해원·보은 상관연동의 상생의 행복공창, 그리고 도통·선경 상관연동의 인존의 활사개공으로 연결되기에 이를 상관연동으로 고찰한다. 천지공사를 주재하는 '인신현현(人神顯現)'의 구천상제는 공공동량 구제 사업에 임하였다. '활사개공'의 공공윤리 지표는 도통군자에 나타나 있다. 천지공사로서 선천세계가 개벽되고 지상천국이 건설된다. 천지공사 공공윤리 전망으로 온 누리에 선경의 화평세상을 이룩하기에, 세계시민성·우주시민성 시대도래를 예견할 수 있다.

• 안보군사학연구
• /
• 통권13호
• /
• pp.687-738
• /
• 2016

To prepare for the complicated international relationship regarding Korean Peninsula after reunification, this thesis started off with the awareness that Unified Korea should build its international posture and national security at an early stage by determining its appropriate military strength for independent defense and military strategies that Unified Korea should aim. The main theme of this thesis is 'The research on appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military'. To derive appropriate military strength of Unified Korea, this research focuses on conflict scenario and relative balance strategy based on potential threats posed by neighboring countries, and this is the part that differentiates this research from other researches. First of all, the main objective of the research is to decide appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to secure defense sufficiency. For this, this research will decide efficient military strategy that Unified Korea should aim. Than by presuming the most possible military conflict scenario, this research will judge the most appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to overcome the dispute. Second, after deciding appropriate military strength, this research will suggest how to operate presumed military strength in each armed force. The result of this thesis is as in the following. First, Unified Korea should aim 'relative balance strategy'. 'Relative balance strategy' is a military strategy which Unified Korea can independently secure defense sufficiency by maintaining relative balance when conflicts occur between neighboring countries. This strategy deters conflicts in advance by relative balance of power in certain time and place. Even if conflict occurs inevitably, this strategy secures initiative. Second, when analyzing neighboring countries interest and strategic environment after unification, the possibility of all-out war will be low in the Korean Peninsula because no other nation wants the Korean Peninsula to be subordinated to one single country. Therefore appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military would be enough when Unified Korea can achieve relative balance in regional war or limited war. Third, Northeast Asia is a region where economic power and military strength is concentrated. Despite increasing mutual cooperation in the region, conflicts and competition to expand each countries influence is inherent. Japan is constantly enhancing their military strength as they aim for normal statehood. China is modernizing their military strength as they aspire to become global central nation. Russia is also enhancing their military strength in order to hold on to their past glory of Soviet Union as a world power. As a result, both in quality and quantity, the gap between military strength of Unified Korea and each neighboring countries is enlarged at an alarming rate. Especially in the field of air-sea power, arms race is occurring between each nation. Therefore Unified Korea should be equipped with appropriate military strength in order to achieve relative balance with each threats posed by neighboring countries. Fourth, the most possible conflicts between Unified Korea and neighboring countries could be summarized into four, which are Dokdo territorial dispute with Japan, Leodo jurisdictional dispute with China, territorial dispute concerning northern part of the Korea Peninsula with China and disputes regarding marine resources and sea routes with Russia. Based on those conflict scenarios, appropriate military strength for Unified Korea is as in the following. When conflict occurs with Japan regarding Dokdo, Japan is expected to put JMSDF Escort Flotilla 3, one out of four of its Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Escort Fleet, which is based in Maizuru and JMSDF Maizuru District. To counterbalance this military strength, Unified Korea needs one task fleet, comprised with three task flotilla. In case of jurisdictional conflict with China concerning Leodo, China is expected to dispatch its North Sea fleet, one out of three of its naval fleet, which is in charge of the Yellow Sea. To response to this military action, Unified Korea needs one task fleet, comprised with three task flotilla. In case of territorial dispute concerning northern part of the Korean Peninsula with China, it is estimated that out of seven Military Region troops, China will dispatch two Military Region troops, including three Army Groups from Shenyang Military Region, where it faces boarder with the Korean Peninsula. To handle with this military strength, Unified Korea needs six corps size ground force strength, including three corps of ground forces, two operational reserve corps(maneuver corps), and one strategic reserve corps(maneuver corps). When conflict occurs with Russia regarding marine resources and sea routes, Russia is expected to send a warfare group of a size that includes two destroyers, which is part of the Pacific Fleet. In order to balance this strength, Unified Korea naval power requires one warfare group including two destroyers. Fifth, management direction for the Unified Korean military is as in the following. Regarding the ground force management, it would be most efficient to deploy troops in the border area with china for regional and counter-amphibious defense. For the defense except the border line with china, the most efficient form of force management would be maintaining strategic reserve corps. The naval force should achieve relative balance with neighboring countries when there is maritime dispute and build 'task fleet' which can independently handle long-range maritime mission. Of the three 'task fleet', one task fleet should be deployed at Jeju base to prepare for Dokdo territorial dispute and Leodo jurisdictional dispute. Also in case of regional conflict with china, one task fleet should be positioned at Yellow Sea and for regional conflict with Japan and Russia, one task fleet should be deployed at East Sea. Realistically, Unified Korea cannot possess an air force equal to neither Japan nor China in quantity. Therefore, although Unified Korea's air force might be inferior in quantity, they should possess the systematic level which Japan or China has. For this Unified Korea should build air base in island areas like Jeju Island or Ullenong Island to increase combat radius. Also to block off infiltration of enemy attack plane, air force needs to build and manage air bases near coastal areas. For landing operation forces, Marine Corps should be managed in the size of two divisions. For island defense force, which is in charge of Jeju Island, Ulleung Island, Dokdo Island and five northwestern boarder island defenses, it should be in the size of one brigade. Also for standing international peace keeping operation, it requires one brigade. Therefore Marine Corps should be organized into three divisions. The result of the research yields a few policy implications when building appropriate military strength for Unified Korea. First, Unified Korea requires lower number of ground troops compared to that of current ROK(Republic of Korea) force. Second, air-sea forces should be drastically reinforced. Third, appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military should be based on current ROK military system. Forth, building appropriate military strength for Unified Korea should start from today, not after reunification. Because of this, South Korea should build a military power that can simultaneously prepare for current North Korea's provocations and future threats from neighboring countries after reunification. The core of this research is to decide appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to realize relative balance that will ensure defense sufficiency from neighboring countries threats. In other words, this research should precisely be aware of threats posed by neighboring countries and decide minimum level of military strength that could realize relative balance in conflict situation. Moreover this research will show the path for building appropriate military strength in each armed force.