溥齋 李相卨의 독립운동론과 독립운동

Abstract

Lee Sang-seol is one of the representative independence activists who strived to practice an all-encompassing idea of independence movement against the broad time setting from the late Joseon Dynasty to the 1910s. Lee’s activities, however, were overly undervalued, or misunderstood, in favor of other independent activists. This study aims to establish Lee Sang-seol rightful position in Korean history by re-examining his involvement in the independence movement. Findings from the study are summarized as follows. First, to investigate the economic background that enabled Lee Sang-seol to lead the independent movement such as the operation of ‘Seojeonseosuk’, Lee’s ownership of lands in his hometown Jincheon was examined based on Chungcheongbukdo Jincheon County Land Register (1901). According to the register, Lee was a great landowner possessing 83 lots of land that were 180,081 cheok long, with a yield rate of 11 gyeol and 39 bu (19.7 jeongbo in area) and spanning across four townships including Chopyeong-myeon. The current value of his lands is estimated to be between 8 billion and 10 billion won. Therefore, adding up the corresponding amount of money from setting his properties upon his asylum, including his house and land in Seoul and the lands in Jincheon, will shed light on the size of his asylum fund. This will also provide concrete clues to discuss the fighting fund for the independence activists. Second, Lee Sang-seol had a significant influence on An Jung-geun’s Treatise on Peace in East Asia, and was the man behind An’s undertaking of the assassination of Ito Hirobumi. Until now, however, Lee’s role was not adequately recognized as he was overshadowed by Choi Jae-hyeong and Ryu In-seok. Nevertheless, the fact that An Jung-geun especially spoke highly of Lee’s pacifism for the East as he was being interrogated by the Japanese police, and the fact that Japanese government took note of Lee while the Chinese press reports focused on the relationship between An and Lee prove that the real power behind An’s patriotic deed was none other than Lee Sang-seol. Third, the approach of understanding Lee’s activity as republic based on the fact that Lee was elected as the President of the Korean Independence Army Government and was active in the Shinhan Revolutionary Party is inappropriate. The Korean Independence Army Government was not the Korean Government in exile, but was a group organized around military operations to undertake armed struggle against the Japanese government. Instead, the Korean Independence Army Government should be considered as the development of the 13 Provinces Righteous Armies, a militia organization. The President of the Korean Independence Army Government also was not the head of the state but simply the military commander. Thus, the Korean Independence Army Government was not a new system of government replacing the existing Joseon dynasty. In fact, as the closest aide of Emperor Gwangmu, Lee Sang-seol held the idea of government system based on constitutional monarchy from the time of his exile to the time of his death for the country. Fourth, as an advocate of the reconciliation and integration of the Korean society in Maritime Province in Russia, Lee Sang-seol played a decisive role in organizing Gwoneophoi. This has also been neglected in previous studies. The fractional strife within the Korean society in Maritime Province in Russia reached a boiling point with the ‘Yang Seong-chun incident’ (Jan. 23, 1910) caused by Lee’s right-hand man, Jeong Sun-man, and the ensuing murder of Jeong Sun-man (June 21, 1911). However, the establishment of Gwoneophoi finally came to fruition with the effort of Lee Sang-seol, who sent a letter of reconciliation to Jeong Jae-gwan. Yet, the reconciliation with the Northwest fraction did not last long. Accused of being a spy, Lee was expelled to Khabarovsk in 1913. The fact that he took note of Shanghai as a new base of the Independent movement in his will left to his comrades suggests a change in his idea for independence movement. However, Lee’s vision was not realized because he died for his country before long. Finally, this study confirmed that the date of Lee’s death was not April 22, 1917, and should be corrected to April 1, 1917. The aim of this study was to establish Lee Sang-seol rightful position in Korean history by shedding new light on the important events and groups in the history of independent movement in Maritime Province in Russia. Unfortunately, a considerable part of the explication in this study had to be inferred, partly because Russian references such as the materials in the ‘Russian State Historical Archive of the Far East’ were rarely accessible. These sections remain as a great blank in the study of the independent movement by Koreans in Maritime Province in Russia as well as Lee Sang-seol.