본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

1931년 華僑排斥事件과 조선 민족주의운동

Overseas-Chinese Exclusion and Chosun Nationalism Movement of 1931

0

조회

0

다운로드

11

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

This paper analyzed the background, the cause, the violence process, and the lead influence of the overseas-Chinese exclusion that took place in 1931. Unlike the general understanding that the exclusion in 1931 started spontaneously, it was thoroughly planned and run by organizations made up of young adults and students. Moreover, a movement defending Korean Residents in Manchuria was in commenced and developed into violent riot, which involved rallies gathering crowd and attacking the overseas-Chinese. After in its inception in Incheon, the movement expanded all across the country. Dong-Ah Ilbo reported the overseas-Chinese exclusion as the result brought on by ignorance and violence of the ignorant class. But is that really the case? This paper begs to differ. It would be irresponsible to categorize the overseas-Chinese exclusion as an emotional explosion of the ignorant. This event was begun by premeditation within the nationalism camp, and Japan played a role in wrongful dismissal of it. The protagonist of this event is clearly Chosun’s nationalists. The overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1931 comprises speculations and effort towards revitalizing Chosun’s nationalist movement. Following the settlement of Shinganhoe, there was a need in the nationalism camp to enhance the nationalist movement through practice. When the Wanbao Mountain Incident broke out, uncompromising nationalism camp tried actively to use the opportunity. To this day, the two events Shinganhoe and the overseas-Chinese exclusion were considered independent events. Nevertheless, it is the author’s opinion that they have an intimate correlation. In the development of Shinganhoe, the overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1927 played a significant role. The overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1931 was the déjà vu of the exclusion in 1927. While the exclusion in 1927 played a role of revitalizing organization of Shinganhoe’s branches through movement of defending Korean Residents in Manchuria and uniting nationalism’s capacity, the exclusion of 1931 played a significant role in expanding the camp of uncompromising nationalism. Just as the exclusion in 1927 started based on false rumor that it is overall establishment of Korean Residents in Manchuria, the exclusion in 1931 began based on false information that a Chosun person was murdered by a Chinese official at Wanbao Mountain. The organizations that circulated this information were Chosun Daily News and Dong-Ah Daily News, Chosun Daily News being more active of the two in circulating it. The articles on Korean Residents in Manchuria was the ideal opportunity to avoid censorship of Japan while inspiring nationalism among the Chosun people. Not only that, enabled to defend Korean Residents in Manchuria, it was an opportunity to openly expand the influence upon nationalism; moreover, it provided an opportunity to unite the left and right camps. The overseas-Chinese exclusion is strongly believed to have occurred to establish are presentative organization of unified Chosun by enhancing a mass movement of uncompromising nationalism camp. Mass movements were enhanced through the overseas-Chinese exclusion and various activity spaces were opened; however, it did not go as far as establishing an organization representing unified Chosun.

Abstract

This paper analyzed the background, the cause, the violence process, and the lead influence of the overseas-Chinese exclusion that took place in 1931. Unlike the general understanding that the exclusion in 1931 started spontaneously, it was thoroughly planned and run by organizations made up of young adults and students. Moreover, a movement defending Korean Residents in Manchuria was in commenced and developed into violent riot, which involved rallies gathering crowd and attacking the overseas-Chinese. After in its inception in Incheon, the movement expanded all across the country. Dong-Ah Ilbo reported the overseas-Chinese exclusion as the result brought on by ignorance and violence of the ignorant class. But is that really the case? This paper begs to differ. It would be irresponsible to categorize the overseas-Chinese exclusion as an emotional explosion of the ignorant. This event was begun by premeditation within the nationalism camp, and Japan played a role in wrongful dismissal of it. The protagonist of this event is clearly Chosun’s nationalists. The overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1931 comprises speculations and effort towards revitalizing Chosun’s nationalist movement. Following the settlement of Shinganhoe, there was a need in the nationalism camp to enhance the nationalist movement through practice. When the Wanbao Mountain Incident broke out, uncompromising nationalism camp tried actively to use the opportunity. To this day, the two events Shinganhoe and the overseas-Chinese exclusion were considered independent events. Nevertheless, it is the author’s opinion that they have an intimate correlation. In the development of Shinganhoe, the overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1927 played a significant role. The overseas-Chinese exclusion of 1931 was the déjà vu of the exclusion in 1927. While the exclusion in 1927 played a role of revitalizing organization of Shinganhoe’s branches through movement of defending Korean Residents in Manchuria and uniting nationalism’s capacity, the exclusion of 1931 played a significant role in expanding the camp of uncompromising nationalism. Just as the exclusion in 1927 started based on false rumor that it is overall establishment of Korean Residents in Manchuria, the exclusion in 1931 began based on false information that a Chosun person was murdered by a Chinese official at Wanbao Mountain. The organizations that circulated this information were Chosun Daily News and Dong-Ah Daily News, Chosun Daily News being more active of the two in circulating it. The articles on Korean Residents in Manchuria was the ideal opportunity to avoid censorship of Japan while inspiring nationalism among the Chosun people. Not only that, enabled to defend Korean Residents in Manchuria, it was an opportunity to openly expand the influence upon nationalism; moreover, it provided an opportunity to unite the left and right camps. The overseas-Chinese exclusion is strongly believed to have occurred to establish are presentative organization of unified Chosun by enhancing a mass movement of uncompromising nationalism camp. Mass movements were enhanced through the overseas-Chinese exclusion and various activity spaces were opened; however, it did not go as far as establishing an organization representing unified Chosun.

참고문헌 (35)

  1. 臺灣中央硏究院近代史硏究所所藏, "駐韓使館檔案", 調査報告1932年11, 12, 13, 15, 僑務1931年4, 11, 12, 13, 1932년 4, 5, ~
  2. 동아일보, , ~ (1931)
  3. 조선일보, , ~ (1931)
  4. 신한민보, , ~ (1931)
  5. 姜在彦, "抗日光州學生事件資料", 朝鮮總督府警務局
  6. 안재홍, "해소파에게 與함", 批判, (7·8) (1931)
  7. 吳基永, "平壤暴動事件回顧, 在滿同胞問題특집", 동광, 25(9) (1931), 국사편찬위원회 한국사데이터베이스
  8. 王霖, "萬寶山事件" (1991), 吉林人民出版社
  9. "『한민족독립운동사자료집』 56(中國人襲擊事件裁判記錄), 의견서 , 신문조서, 소행조서", 국사편찬위원회 한국사데이터베이스, ~
  10. 김경일, "동아시아의 민족이산과 도시: 20세기 전반 만주의 조선인" (2004), 역사비평사
  11. 馬仲可, "山東華僑硏究" (2005), 신성출판사
  12. 박영석, "萬寶山事件硏究: 日帝大陸侵略政策의 一環으로서의", 亞細亞出版社 (1985)
  13. 송병기, "近代韓中關係史硏究" (1985), 檀國大出版部
  14. 이균영, "신간회연구" (1994), 역사비평사
  15. 전해종, "韓中關係史硏究" (1970), 일조각
  16. 김희용, "일제강점기 한국인의 화교배척", 석사, 역사교육, pp.2009
  17. 사보혜, "만보산사건과 인천 화교배척사건 연구 :재만한인과 재한화교의 관계사적 입장에서", 석사, 역사교육, pp.2009
  18. 叢成義, "萬寶山事件之硏究", 碩士, pp.1983
  19. 강진아, "만주사변 전후 재한화교 문제의 양상 ― 朝鮮總督府 外事課와 在韓中國領事館 간 왕복문서를 중심으로 ―", 동양사학연구, (120), pp.261~305 (2012), 동양사학회
  20. 김영신, "일제시기 재한화교(1910-1931) -인천지역 화교를 중심으로-", 인천학연구, 4 (2005)
  21. 김인식, "안재홍의 신간회운동", 愛山學報, (33) (2007)
  22. 김태웅, "1920·30년대 한국인 대중의 華僑 認識과 國內 民族主義 系列 知識人의 내면세계", 역사교육, (112), pp.93~131 (2009), 역사교육연구회
  23. 민두기, "滿洲에서의 萬寶山事件(1931)과 한국 언론의 대응 -상이한 민족주의적 시각", 東洋史學硏究, 65 (1999)
  24. 박정현, "1927년 재만동포옹호동맹의 결성과 화교배척사건", 중국학보, (69), pp.105~128 (2014), 한국중국학회
  25. 박영석, "日本帝國主義下在滿韓人의 法的地位에 관한 諸問題-1931년 滿州事變이전을 중심으로-", 한국민족운동사연구, 11 (1995)
  26. 孫承會, "萬寶山事件과 中國共産黨", 동양사학연구, 83, pp.4~149 (2003), 동양사학회
  27. 손승회, "소설 ?萬寶山?과 萬寶山事件", 대동문화연구, (54), pp.183~213 (2006), 대동문화연구원
  28. 손승회, "1931년 植民地朝鮮의 排華暴動과 華僑", 중국근현대사연구, (41), pp.141~165 (2009), 중국근현대사학회
  29. 吳世昌, "白山學報", 白山學報, 9 (1970)
  30. 윤상원, "만보산 사건과 조선인 사회주의자들의 중국 인식", 한국사연구, (156), pp.271~296 (2012), 한국사연구회
  31. 이상경, "1931년의 ‘배화(排華)사건’과 민족주의 담론", 만주연구, (11), pp.85~115 (2011), 만주학회
  32. 李在鈴, "南京國民政府시기 韓國言論의 中國認識", 중국학논총, (15), pp.285~307 (2003), 한국중국문화학회
  33. 이재령, "南京國民政府時期 中國의 韓國認識 ―萬寶山事件에 관한 輿論動向을 중심으로 ―", 중국사연구, (31), pp.367~399 (2004), 중국사학회
  34. 朝鮮近代史料硏究會, "未公開資料朝鮮總督府關係者錄音記錄(2) -朝鮮統治における在滿朝鮮人問題-", 東洋文化硏究, 3 (2001)
  35. 최병도, "萬寶山 사건 직후 華僑排斥事件에 대한 日帝의 대응", 한국사연구, (156), pp.297~329 (2012), 한국사연구회

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)