• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.371-405
• /
• 2004

International circulation of cultural assets involves numerous countries thereby making an approach based on international law essential to resolving this problem. Since the end of the $2^{nd}$ World War, as the value of cultural assets evolved from material value to moral and ethical values, with emphasis on establishing national identities, newly independent nations and former colonial states took issue with ownership of cultural assets which led to the need for international cooperation and statutory provisions for the return of cultural assets. UNESCO's 1954 "Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict" as preparatory measures for the protection of cultural assets, the 1970 "Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property" to regulate transfer of cultural assets, and the 1995 "Unidroit Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects" which required the return of illegally acquired cultural property are examples of international agreements established on illegal transfers of cultural assets. In addition, the UN agency UNESCO established the Division of Cultural Heritage to oversee cultural assets related matters, and the UN since its 1973 resolution 3187, has continued to demonstrate interest in protection of cultural assets. The resolution 3187 affirms the return of cultural assets to the country of origin, advises on preventing illegal transfers of works of art and cultural assets, advises cataloguing cultural assets within the respective countries and, conclusively, recommends becoming a member of UNESCO, composing a forum for international cooperation. Differences in defining cultural assets pose a limitation on international agreements. While the 1954 Convention states that cultural assets are not limited to movable property and includes immovable property, the 1970 Convention's objective of 'Prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property' effectively limits the subject to tangible movable cultural property. The 1995 Convention also has tangible movable cultural property as its subject. On this point, the two conventions demonstrate distinction from the 1954 Convention and the 1972 Convention that focuses on immovable cultural property and natural property. The disparity in defining cultural property is due to the object and purpose of the convention and does not reflect an inherent divergence. In the case of Korea, beginning with the 1866 French invasion, 36 years of Japanese colonial rule, military rule and period of economic development caused outflow of numerous cultural assets to foreign countries. Of course, it is neither possible nor necessary to have all of these cultural properties returned, but among those that have significant value in establishing cultural and historical identity or those that have been taken symbolically as a demonstration of occupational rule can cause issues in their return. In these cases, the 1954 Convention and the ratification of the first legislation must be actively considered. In the return of cultural property, if the illicit acquisition is the core issue, it is a simple matter of following the international accords, while if it rises to the level of diplomatic discussions, it will become a political issue. In that case, the country requesting the return must convince the counterpart country. Realizing a response to the earnest need for preventing illicit trading of cultural assets will require extensive national and civic societal efforts in the East Asian area to overcome its current deficiencies. The most effective way to prevent illicit trading of cultural property is rapid circulation of information between Interpol member countries, which will require development of an internet based communication system as well as more effective deployment of legislation to prevent trading of illicitly acquired cultural property, subscription to international conventions and cataloguing collections.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.24-43
• /
• 2015

Since 2011, when Oegyujanggak Uigwe(Records of the State Rites of the Joseon Dynasty) were returned from France, which were looted in 1866 by the French Navy, national attention to our cultural properties abroad was explosively increased and public pressure has been mounting that those cultural properties should be returned in Korea. According to the statistics of "Overseas Korean Cultural Heritage Foundation" Korean cultural Properties, which exist in foreign countries, amounts 160,342 in total 20 countries. Among them about half of them are estimated to be illegally exported cultural property, these are to be restituted. However, in reality it is not so easy to restitute illegally exported cultural properties. For this, it needs to be established a long-term and systematic plan for return of cultural properties from other countries. This paper starts from such a critical mind and tries to find legal policy measures for the return of illegally exported cultural properties. To this end, the author first describes motive and aim of this research in chapter I. and overviews basic understanding and current situation of export of cultural property as well as means and methods of return of cultural property in chapter II. and then deals with international and national norms that are involved in the dispute concerned return of cultural properties in chapter III. Based on this research, in chapter IV., which can be considered as a key part of this paper, the author proposed nine legal policy measures for restitution of cultural properties from foreign countries. That is, actual condition survey of cultural properties in foreign countries, unified management and implement of export ID on cultural properties, fund-raising for the diversification of means of return of cultural properties. local utilization of cultural properties, joining in the multilateral conventions and expansion of the bilateral agreements, restitution and cooperation through international organizations, restitution through lawsuit and arbitration, training experts on restitution of cultural property and networking with foreign experts. Finally, the author summarized his opinion in chapter V. which comprehended researching the above.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.274-291
• /
• 2020

This year is the 50th anniversary of the adoption by UNESCO in 1970 of the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (the '1970 Convention'). Since its ratification of the 1970 Convention in 1983, the Republic of Korea has domestically implemented the Convention through its Cultural Heritage Protection Act, which was first enacted in 1962. This is a different form of implementation than is normally used for other UNESCO Conventions on cultural heritage, in that the Republic of Korea has recently adopted special acts to enforce the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage and the 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. In addition, the 1970 Convention has been developed further through the introduction of new Operational Guidelines in 2015 for the concrete enforcement of the Convention, which has provided momentum for the Republic of Korea to analyze its current national legislation related to the 1970 Convention as well as consider its amendment in the future. Overall, the Cultural Heritage Protection Act of the Republic of Korea effectively reflects the duties of States Parties under the 1970 Convention. These include measures to introduce export certificates, prohibit the import of stolen cultural property, return other state parties' cultural property, and impose penalties or administrative sanctions in the event of any infringements. Indeed, the Republic of Korea's implementation of the 1970 Convention was introduced as an example of good practice at the Meeting of State Parties in 2019. However, changes in the illegal market for cultural property and development of relevant international law and measures imply that there still exists room for improvement concerning the legal implementation of the 1970 Convention at the national level. In particular, the Operational Guidelines recommend States Parties to adopt legal measures in two respects: detailed criteria for due diligence in assessing bona-fide purchasers, referring to the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects, and measures to address the emerging issue of illegal trade in cultural property on internet platforms. Amendment of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act and other relevant laws should be considered in order to duly reflect these issues. Taking that opportunity, concrete provisions to facilitate international cooperation in respect of the implementation of the 1970 Convention could be introduced as well. Such measures could be expected to strengthen the Republic of Korea's international legal cooperation to respond to the changing environment regarding illicit trafficking of cultural property and its restitution.

• Korean Association of Arts Management
• /
• no.51
• /
• pp.191-219
• /
• 2019

Adoption of applicable law for the international trade of artworks is closely related to the results of lawsuits. Recently, starting with New York, the hub of the international artworks market, a modern, mixed-law is gradually being adopted more. It is difficult to designate an applicable law of an international trade of artworks through private laws regulations of relevant countries, and the public laws regulations must also be considered in relation to individual benefits and the public benefits to the relevant countries. With regards to the foreign relations issues, Korea's private international law embraces a so-called public order theory, and according to the Section 7 of the Act on the Private International Law and its enactment history, the compulsory provision, which seems appropriate for application to the corresponding matter, applies without regards to the selection of the applicable law. The Civil Act of Korea acknowledges bona fide acquisition of a cultural asset, in principle, if the Cultural Heritage Protection Act is not applicable. Moreover, a lost artwork is also a subject of bona fide acquisition; however, if the relevant artwork is either stolen or lost, the original owner has the right to demand the return of that artwork within 2 years of being stolen or lost according to the Section 250 of the Civil Act. Also, if the buyer purchased from a distributor specializing in the artworks, such as auction, open market or gallery, the buyer could request a compensation of the purchase price from the original owner, and if the buyer purchased through a private transaction, the buyer cannot demand a compensation of the purchase price and must return the artwork.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.54 no.2
• /
• pp.136-153
• /
• 2021

The restitution of cultural heritage located abroad has been going on for 107 years, starting with the return of the Jigwangguksa Tower to Beopcheonsaji Temple in Wonju after it was taken during the Japanese occupation in 1915. The Overseas Cultural Heritage Foundation, established in 2012, has laid the foundation for retrieval, preservation, restoration, and exchange of cultural heritage through research cooperation and the purchasing of cultural heritage items. The pace of the collection of cultural heritage objects and the locating of others has increased every year since its establishment, and the number of returned, rather than recovered, cultural heritage items has also increased. The present study aimed to complete a value inquiry of the cultural relics of Waryongmae (臥龍梅) and a restitution of cultural heritage as the main focuses. The process of recovering relics from Waryongmae has been recorded in the book The Cultural Property Returned into Our Arms, published by the above-mentioned foundation. This record was revised and supplemented to try and raise its cultural value by adding elaborate storytelling to the process of recovering the Waryongmae that grew in the courtyard of Changdeokgung Palace. The cultural value of Waryongmae is that it is unique. The Waryongmae is the first living cultural heritage, and therefore has cultural value due to its uniqueness. Second, the Waryongmae has unique cultural value due to its restitution and return to Korea twice, once in 1992, and another time in 1999. The first restitution was special in that it was featured by the Japanese media, and the second was special in that it was intensively reported by the Korean media. Third, 42 Waryongmae cultural content types were explored, including nineteen visual contents, eleven interactive contents, and twelve skate contents.

• Conservation Science in Museum
• /
• v.29
• /
• pp.111-132
• /
• 2023

Terahertz radiation cannot pass through metal and therefore reflect and return most signals. Utilizing this property, this study analyzed information on paintings to verify the usage of metal materials on paintings and the scope of their application. First, the study tested specimens of metal-based pigments and synthetic pearl pigments with metallic colors and textures in order to compare basic characteristics of terahertz images, such as signal severance caused by metallic substances, traits reflected in cross-section images, and high degree of reflection. Subsequently, based on the collected information, the study diagnosed various types of paintings including Korean traditional paintings and oil paintings using the terahertz imaging technique to confirm the usage of metal-based pigments in the inner layers of paintings and their scope of application. The terahertz imaging technique could has the potential to provide scientific evidence for previously-undiscovered information and art-historical records about various types of paintings that used metalbased pigments, thereby rendering significant utility for the conservation and authentication of paintings.