• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.74-95
• /
• 2009

Folk villages have higher historic and cultural values than other villages and contain considerably many traditional elements today. In Korea, there are seven folk villages that are under the protection of the Cultural Properties Protection Act. Unlike other kinds of tangible cultural assets individually appointed according to the act, those folk villages are protected by the act in entirety including the houses and auxiliary structures inhabited and used by the villagers. Since the act covers the entire villages, the residents are not allowed to repair or renovate their structures and accordingly suffer from huge limitations in everyday life with housing life under the biggest restrictions. Being appointed as a folk village is positive from the perspective of preserving the village. However, it is negative to the villagers because of the limitations to their housing lives. While common people lead a convenient life by the introduction of high technologies in modern society, they do not get to benefit from such technologies for the cause of preserving the traditional culture. Upon the appointment, they are subject to all sorts of building regulations and under huge direct and indirect influences of those regulations across many different aspects of life including housing life. Thus the residents of folk villages do have many complaints about the act. It is only natural that there occur conflicts between the state, which tries to preserve the traditional culture according to the act, and the residents, who pursue convenience in life. At the same time, it is natural too that the residents have the desire to pursue convenience in daily life. Thus they renovate their houses illegally. The government agencies are aware of that, however, it is not right for them to enforce the act and restrict their daily lives. Their tacit approval of such illegal renovations is the product of compromises between the residents' right to their private property and the state's policies of cultural asset protection. The residents try to renovate their houses within the limit that will not call for legal restrictions from the government agencies. The government allows for renovations as long as they are within the minimum limit. It is the result of efforts for the state and the residents to stitch up and compromise their own complaints.