임진왜란기(1592~1598) 반역 사건의 발생과 처리과정

Abstract

The external factor that endangers the state is war, and the internal factor is treason. Treason was a direct attack on the king outside of the institutional sphere. For this reason, the political and social impact of treason was significant. In particular, the treason that occurred during the war made society more confused. The treason case took advantage of the weakening of control caused by the war and raised complaints against the existing society. The plotting incident during the Imjin Warr(壬辰倭亂), was planned and implemented in the form of gathering troops in the provinces. Under the Joseon(朝鮮) military system, individuals were unable to mobilize their troops, so there was no counter-measures in the form of gathering troops. The incidents in which soldiers were gathered to rebel during their ancestors were concentrated in the early Joseon Dynasty, including the incident of assistant in the Jo-saui(趙思義) case in 1402, the Cha-hyunu(車 玄有) case in 1434, and the Lee-siae(李施愛) case in 1467. For the next 100 years, there was no counter-plotting incident in the form of gathering military forces, and it happened again during the Imjin War. This can be said to have originated from the experience of war and the experience of righteous soldiers. There were five incidents of treason during the Imjin War. The incidents that took place in the early days of the Imjin War, were ①Lee Chun-beom(李忠範) and Seo Mong-lin(徐夢獜) case, ②Gook-Gyeongin(鞠慶仁) case ③Song Yu-jin(宋儒眞) case, ④Byun Ha-bok(邊遐福) case, ⑤Lee Mong-hak(李夢鶴) and Han-Hyun(韓絢) case. Among them, the incidents in which the righteous soldiers were confirmed to have participated were the ③ case and the ⑤ case. Lee Sang-kyum(李山謙) was involved in the ③ case, and Kim Deok-ryong(金德齡) was involved in the ⑤ case. In addition to the chief righteous army, righteous army forces are believed to have joined the rebel forces. The Imperial Court distinguished those who actively participated in the rebellion from those who committed the crime, and punished those who responded to military recruitment based on the experience of righteous soldiers. This is a characteristic of the decision to deal with the treason of ancestors. The Imperial Court took measures to take lenient measures rather than hostile or suspicious of the righteous army for the reason that the righteous army participated in the rebel forces. In the case of the principal offender who participated in the treason case, even if he was a righteous soldier, he was punished according to the law, but in my case, we did not charge him with treason. In addition, in order not to punish those who participated in the rebellion through conciliatory and intimidation, ancestral filial piety was issued several times in the area where the rebellion occurred. The mediation measures did not remain in force, but led to discussions and measures to exempt them from excessive service and taxes. Amid the social turmoil caused by the war, the Imperial Court gave lenient treatment for fear that public sentiment would be separated and necessary.