Purpose: The study is to check the specialty of radiotherapists working in the department of radiation oncology and find job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job commitment having an effect on professional parts. After making analysis of the mutual relation, it is to provide radiotechnologists with making progress in the future. Materials and Methods: From March 2 to March 30, we had carried out a survey with email. It is possible to have 272 questionnaires answered in the survey. We make use of SPSS 13.0 for Windows to analyze the data collected for study. Frequency and a percentage are meant to show general characteristics, and t-test and ANOVA to do the difference between general properties and professionalism. Pearson's correlation coefficient also is meant to do the correlation of professionalism, organizational job commitment and job satisfaction, and multiple regression analysis to do the factor for a relevant variable to affect professionalism. Results: There are subdivisions in the professionalism informing us of the self-regulation
The main purpose of the investigation of an accident caused by aircraft is to be prevented the sudden and casual accidents caused by wilful misconduct and fault from pilots, air traffic controllers, hijack, trouble of engine and machinery of aircraft, turbulence during the bad weather, collision between birds and aircraft, near miss flight by aircrafts etc. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability for offender of aircraft accidents. Accidents to aircraft, especially those involving the general public and their property, are a matter of great concern to the aviation community. The system of international regulation exists to improve safety and minimize, as far as possible, the risk of accidents but when they do occur there is a web of systems and procedures to investigate and respond to them. I would like to trace the general line of regulation from an international source in the Chicago Convention of 1944. Article 26 of the Convention lays down the basic principle for the investigation of the aircraft accident. Where there has been an accident to an aircraft of a contracting state which occurs in the territory of another contracting state and which involves death or serious injury or indicates serious technical defect in the aircraft or air navigation facilities, the state in which the accident occurs must institute an inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. That inquiry will be in accordance, in so far as its law permits, with the procedure which may be recommended from time to time by the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO). There are very general provisions but they state two essential principles: first, in certain circumstances there must be an investigation, and second, who is to be responsible for undertaking that investigation. The latter is an important point to establish otherwise there could be at least two states claiming jurisdiction on the inquiry. The Chicago Convention also provides that the state where the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint observers to be present at the inquiry and the state holding the inquiry must communicate the report and findings in the matter to that other state. It is worth noting that the Chicago Convention (Article 25) also makes provision for assisting aircraft in distress. Each contracting state undertakes to provide such measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its territory as it may find practicable and to permit (subject to control by its own authorities) the owner of the aircraft or authorities of the state in which the aircraft is registered, to provide such measures of assistance as may be necessitated by circumstances. Significantly, the undertaking can only be given by contracting state but the duty to provide assistance is not limited to aircraft registered in another contracting state, but presumably any aircraft in distress in the territory of the contracting state. Finally, the Convention envisages further regulations (normally to be produced under the auspices of ICAO). In this case the Convention provides that each contracting state, when undertaking a search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in co-ordinated measures which may be recommended from time to time pursuant to the Convention. Since 1944 further international regulations relating to safety and investigation of accidents have been made, both pursuant to Chicago Convention and, in particular, through the vehicle of the ICAO which has, for example, set up an accident and reporting system. By requiring the reporting of certain accidents and incidents it is building up an information service for the benefit of member states. However, Chicago Convention provides that each contracting state undertakes collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To this end, ICAO is to adopt and amend from time to time, as may be necessary, international standards and recommended practices and procedures dealing with, among other things, aircraft in distress and investigation of accidents. Standards and Recommended Practices for Aircraft Accident Injuries were first adopted by the ICAO Council on 11 April 1951 pursuant to Article 37 of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation and were designated as Annex 13 to the Convention. The Standards Recommended Practices were based on Recommendations of the Accident Investigation Division at its first Session in February 1946 which were further developed at the Second Session of the Division in February 1947. The 2nd Edition (1966), 3rd Edition, (1973), 4th Edition (1976), 5th Edition (1979), 6th Edition (1981), 7th Edition (1988), 8th Edition (1992) of the Annex 13 (Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation) of the Chicago Convention was amended eight times by the ICAO Council since 1966. Annex 13 sets out in detail the international standards and recommended practices to be adopted by contracting states in dealing with a serious accident to an aircraft of a contracting state occurring in the territory of another contracting state, known as the state of occurrence. It provides, principally, that the state in which the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint an accredited representative to be present at the inquiry conducted by the state in which the serious aircraft accident occurs. Article 26 of the Chicago Convention does not indicate what the accredited representative is to do but Annex 13 amplifies his rights and duties. In particular, the accredited representative participates in the inquiry by visiting the scene of the accident, examining the wreckage, questioning witnesses, having full access to all relevant evidence, receiving copies of all pertinent documents and making submissions in respect of the various elements of the inquiry. The main shortcomings of the present system for aircraft accident investigation are that some contracting sates are not applying Annex 13 within its express terms, although they are contracting states. Further, and much more important in practice, there are many countries which apply the letter of Annex 13 in such a way as to sterilise its spirit. This appears to be due to a number of causes often found in combination. Firstly, the requirements of the local law and of the local procedures are interpreted and applied so as preclude a more efficient investigation under Annex 13 in favour of a legalistic and sterile interpretation of its terms. Sometimes this results from a distrust of the motives of persons and bodies wishing to participate or from commercial or related to matters of liability and bodies. These may be political, commercial or related to matters of liability and insurance. Secondly, there is said to be a conscious desire to conduct the investigation in some contracting states in such a way as to absolve from any possibility of blame the authorities or nationals, whether manufacturers, operators or air traffic controllers, of the country in which the inquiry is held. The EEC has also had an input into accidents and investigations. In particular, a directive was issued in December 1980 encouraging the uniformity of standards within the EEC by means of joint co-operation of accident investigation. The sharing of and assisting with technical facilities and information was considered an important means of achieving these goals. It has since been proposed that a European accident investigation committee should be set up by the EEC (Council Directive 80/1266 of 1 December 1980). After I would like to introduce the summary of the legislation examples and system for aircraft accidents investigation of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, Swiss, New Zealand and Japan, and I am going to mention the present system, regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation in Korea. Furthermore I would like to point out the shortcomings of the present system and regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation and then I will suggest my personal opinion on the new and dramatic innovation on the system for aircraft accident investigation in Korea. I propose that it is necessary and desirable for us to make a new legislation or to revise the existing aviation act in order to establish the standing and independent Committee of Aircraft Accident Investigation under the Korean Government.
Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain is a ten-panel folding screen with images and postscripts. Commissioned by Bak Gyeong-bin (dates unknown), this screen was painted by Jo Jung-muk (1820-after 1894) in 1868. The postscripts were written by Hong Seon-ju (dates unknown). The National Museum of Korea restored this painting, which had been housed in the museum on separate sheets, to its original folding screen format. The museum also opened the screen to the public for the first time at the special exhibition Through the Eyes of Joseon Painters: Real Scenery Landscapes of Korea held from July 23 to September 22, 2019. Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain depicts real scenery on the western slopes of Inwangsan Mountain spanning present-day Hongje-dong and Hongeun-dong in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul. In the distance, the Bukhansan Mountain ridges are illustrated. The painting also bears place names, including Inwangsan Mountain, Chumohyeon Hill, Hongjewon Inn, Samgaksan Mountain, Daenammun Gate, and Mireukdang Hall. The names and depictions of these places show similarities to those found on late Joseon maps. Jo Jung-muk is thought to have studied the geographical information marked on maps so as to illustrate a broad landscape in this painting. Field trips to the real scenery depicted in the painting have revealed that Jo exaggerated or omitted natural features and blended and arranged them into a row for the purposes of the horizontal picture plane. Jo Jung-muk was a painter proficient at drawing conventional landscapes in the style of the Southern School of Chinese painting. Details in Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain reflect the painting style of the School of Four Wangs. Jo also applied a more decorative style to some areas. The nineteenth-century court painters of the Dohwaseo(Royal Bureau of Painting), including Jo, employed such decorative painting styles by drawing houses based on painting manuals, applying dots formed like sprinkled black pepper to depict mounds of earth and illustrating flowers by dotted thick pigment. Moreover, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain shows the individualistic style of Jeong Seon(1676~1759) in the rocks drawn with sweeping brushstrokes in dark ink, the massiveness of the mountain terrain, and the pine trees simply depicted using horizontal brushstrokes. Jo Jung-muk is presumed to have borrowed the authority and styles of Jeong Seon, who was well-known for his real scenery landscapes of Inwangsan Mountain. Nonetheless, the painting lacks an spontaneous sense of space and fails in conveying an impression of actual sites. Additionally, the excessively grand screen does not allow Jo Jung-muk to fully express his own style. In Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, the texts of the postscripts nicely correspond to the images depicted. Their contents can be divided into six parts: (1) the occupant of the tomb and the reason for its relocation; (2) the location and geomancy of the tomb; (3) memorial services held at the tomb and mysterious responses received during the memorial services; (4) cooperation among villagers to manage the tomb; (5) the filial piety of Bak Gyeong-bin, who commissioned the painting and guarded the tomb; and (6) significance of the postscripts. The second part in particular is faithfully depicted in the painting since it can easily be visualized. According to the fifth part revealing the motive for the production of the painting, the commissioner Bak Gyeongbin was satisfied with the painting, stating that "it appears impeccable and is just as if the tomb were newly built." The composition of the natural features in a row as if explaining each one lacks painterly beauty, but it does succeed in providing information on the geomantic topography of the gravesite. A fair number of the existing depictions of gravesites are woodblock prints of family gravesites produced after the eighteenth century. Most of these are included in genealogical records and anthologies. According to sixteenth- and seventeenth-century historical records, hanging scrolls of family gravesites served as objects of worship. Bowing in front of these paintings was considered a substitute ritual when descendants could not physically be present to maintain their parents' or other ancestors' tombs. Han Hyo-won (1468-1534) and Jo Sil-gul (1591-1658) commissioned the production of family burial ground paintings and asked distinguished figures of the time to write a preface for the paintings, thus showing off their filial piety. Such examples are considered precedents for Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain. Hermitage of the Recluse Seokjeong in a private collection and Old Villa in Hwagae County at the National Museum of Korea are not paintings of family gravesites. However, they serve as references for seventeenth-century paintings depicting family gravesites in that they are hanging scrolls in the style of the paintings of literary gatherings and they illustrate geomancy. As an object of worship, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain recalls a portrait. As indicated in the postscripts, the painting made Bak Gyeong-bin "feel like hearing his father's cough and seeing his attitudes and behaviors with my eyes." The fable of Xu Xiaosu, who gazed at the portrait of his father day and night, is reflected in this gravesite painting evoking a deceased parent. It is still unclear why Bak Gyeong-bin commissioned Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain to be produced as a real scenery landscape in the folding screen format rather than a hanging scroll or woodblock print, the conventional formats for a family gravesite paintings. In the nineteenth century, commoners came to produce numerous folding screens for use during the four rites of coming of age, marriage, burial, and ancestral rituals. However, they did not always use the screens in accordance with the nature of these rites. In the Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, the real scenery landscape appears to have been emphasized more than the image of the gravesite in order to allow the screen to be applied during different rituals or for use to decorate space. The burial mound, which should be the essence of Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, might have been obscured in order to hide its violation of the prohibition on the construction of tombs on the four mountains around the capital. At the western foot of Inwangsan Mountain, which was illustrated in this painting, the construction of tombs was forbidden. In 1832, a tomb discovered illegally built on the forbidden area was immediately dug up and the related people were severely punished. This indicates that the prohibition was effective until the mid-nineteenth century. The postscripts on the Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain document in detail Bak Gyeong-bin's efforts to obtain the land as a burial site. The help and connivance of villagers were necessary to use the burial site, probably because constructing tombs within the prohibited area was a burden on the family and villagers. Seokpajeong Pavilion by Yi Han-cheol (1808~1880), currently housed at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, is another real scenery landscape in the format of a folding screen that is contemporaneous and comparable with Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain. In 1861 when Seokpajeong Pavilion was created, both Yi Han-cheol and Jo Jung-muk participated in the production of a portrait of King Cheoljong. Thus, it is highly probable that Jo Jung-muk may have observed the painting process of Yi's Seokpajeong Pavilion. A few years later, when Jo Jungmuk was commissioned to produce Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain, his experience with the impressive real scenery landscape of the Seokpajeong Pavilion screen could have been reflected in his work. The difference in the painting style between these two paintings is presumed to be a result of the tastes and purposes of the commissioners. Since Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain contains the multilayered structure of a real scenery landscape and family gravesite, it seems to have been perceived in myriad different ways depending on the viewer's level of knowledge, closeness to the commissioner, or viewing time. In the postscripts to the painting, the name and nickname of the tomb occupant as well as the place of his surname are not recorded. He is simply referred to as "Mister Bak." Biographical information about the commissioner Bak Gyeong-bin is also unavailable. However, given that his family did not enter government service, he is thought to have been a person of low standing who could not become a member of the ruling elite despite financial wherewithal. Moreover, it is hard to perceive Hong Seon-ju, who wrote the postscripts, as a member of the nobility. He might have been a low-level administrative official who belonged to the Gyeongajeon, as documented in the Seungjeongwon ilgi (Daily Records of Royal Secretariat of the Joseon Dynasty). Bak Gyeong-bin is presumed to have moved the tomb of his father to a propitious site and commissioned Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain to stress his filial piety, a conservative value, out of his desire to enter the upper class. However, Ancestral Burial Ground on the Inwangsan Mountain failed to live up to its original purpose and ended up as a contradictory image due to its multiple applications and the concern over the exposure of the violation of the prohibition on the construction of tombs on the prohibited area. Forty-seven years after its production, this screen became a part of the collection at the Royal Yi Household Museum with each panel being separated. This suggests that Bak Gyeong-bin's dream of bringing fortune and raising his family's social status by selecting a propitious gravesite did not come true.