을미사변, 그 하루의 기록 ―대원군의 침묵과 명성황후암살의 배후―

Abstract

The Eulmi incident(1895) refers to the assassination of Queen Min, which was committed by a gang of Japanese and Korean criminals who broke into Gyeongbok palace, under the order of the Japanese diplomatic minister in Korea, Miura Gorō (三浦梧樓), and killed the Queen on October 8, 1895. Despite being extensively studied by modern Korean historians, their examinations of this tragic incident have mostly concentrated on the secret and meticulous planning by the Japanese of the assassination, the cruelty of their actions, and how tragically the Queen met her death. Previously, Japanese historians avoided dealing with this Eulmi incident issue, as it was a shameful act executed by their own people. Although they have tried to elaborate on how the incident itself unfolded, records created by central characters such as Miura (三浦梧樓), Sugimura (杉村濬), Gikuchi (菊池謙讓) and Gobayakawa (小早川秀雄), who were all directly related to the incident, were mainly consulted. These figures mostly attributed the Daeweon-gun as being behind the Eulmi incident and planning all the details. Yet in the 1960s, Yamabe (山邊健太郞) revealed that the Japanese minister Miura, who was serving in Korea at the time, had planned the assassination and that the Japanese garrison in Korea was used for the operation. Furthermore, in the 1980s, the Korean historian Park Jong-Geun, who lives in Japan, proved in his studies that Japanese minister Miura planned the assassination and executed his plan by mobilizing Japanese troops, diplomats, the consulate, police, and assassins. Modern Japanese historians agree that minister Miura planned and implemented the assassination of Queen Min, but acted without any higher authority. Studies that support this view of the incident are based on Japanese diplomatic documents and other memoirs written by Japanese people, and their position clearly shows the intention to place blame only on the diplomatic legation in Korea and no one else. Most Korean scholars in their studies 1) confirmed that neither Daeweon-gun nor the Korean Training Unit (Hulleondae) was involved in the incident, 2) and instead emphasized the role played by the Japanese government in the assassination, 3) and concentrated on confirming exactly how the assassination proceeded. In other words, the Korean scholars tried to emphasize the tragic nature of the incident and the barbaric actions of the Japanese involved. Their works definitely contributed to the overall revelation of factual details of the incident. Yet, Japanese Foreign Minister Mutsu Munemitsu (陸奧宗光), who played a key role in the Japanese foreign policy in the aftermath of the Sino-Japanese War, was of the opinion that "the Korean administration ought to be reformed to satisfy the Japanese political needs and serve the Japanese interests." In drafting the Shimonoseki treaty, Mutsu argued that "one important aim of the Sino-Japanese War was the independence of Korea, yet Japan should demand the concession of the Liaodong peninsular and others from the Qing dynasty." Mutsu’s remarks reveal the top Japanese leaders scheme first to separate Korea from the Qing’s territorial domination, and then to occupy Korea fully for use as a springboard for the future continental advance. In short, the Japanese government apparently supported the independence of Korea, while really imposing a protectorate system on Korea.