3․1 독립운동과 행정법학 ―저항을 받은 법이론과 사법권의 독립―

Abstract

1. Judicial Documents of 3․1 Independent Movement (三・一運動裁判記錄), in：Independent Contributors (獨立有功者), i. e., the National Office of Reward for the Independent (國家報勳處), Edited by, Compilation of the Historical Documents Relating to the Independent Movement (獨立運動史資料集), vol. 5, (1973), has the index of the 10,000 people accused because of 3․1 Independent Movement, but many names of up to now unknown accused are newly found from the examination of the courts of the Government General of Korea, which anybody can research by the microfilm kept in the Archives. If so, we can‘t say that there are 10,000 cases and 10,000 accused, because there is only one case usually even if the accused are plural, and also there may be treble cases corresponding to the three instances of the district court (地方法院), the court of appeal (覆審法院) and the high court(高等法院)．Therefore we must distinct the whole number of the accused and the whole one of the cases. And then the reporter has collected the about 1,200 cases (excluding civil war cases) relative to the three instances, but they are only a part of the whole, so that we don t know the whole number. 2. Paik, Un-Sik, Bloody History of Korean Independent Movement (1920) (朴殷植『朝鮮獨立運動の血史』) said that the commander of military policemen in Korea had the right to judge a certain criminal cases and to arbitrate civil cases. And Kiyoshi Nagano and Harujiro Taguchi, “Korean Administrative Law”(1914) the textbook supported by the Government General of Korea, recognized such an authority publicly as a matter of fact, which Korean people became distrustful of gradually. But the authority was abolished immediately after 3․1 Independent Movement. Then what does the abolishment mean to the colonial rule? 3. After 3․1 Independent Movement forcible exercise of colonial power which Nagano and Taguchi’s textbook demonstrated, disappeared outwardly and was replaced by the textbooks which considered positive laws in Korea important：Hikozo Hagiwara, “Korean Administrative”(1935/1921), Bin Sonobe, “Administrative Law”(1933) and Tatsutaka Uchida, “Administrative Law”(1934/1933). These scholars did not refer to the abolishment. But Atsushi Kurumada, “Korean Administrative Law”(1934) referred to it, and urged not only the limited administrative power as well as Tatsukichi Minobe, but also recognized the right of the people to protest against power exceeding the limitation established by law. Accordingly I suppose that Kurumada could understand a historical meaning of change of colonial practice which 3․1 Independent Movement brought about, in strengthening judicial power against administrative authority.