조선후기 전준과 관식의 준수에 관한 실증적 고찰

Abstract

In 1996, Hyun Yeong Kim analyzed the meaning of the term Jeon-Jun (傳准) as a kind of official certification of the copied document. However, four civil court records which were recorded at Jeju local government gives me the idea that there was different meaning in the term Jeon-Jun. In this article, I introduced the evidence and argued that the term was also used as one party’s ratification of the authenticity of the document provided by the adversary party. The conclusion of this article is as follows. First, there were two different meanings in Jeon-Jun, one was official certification of the copied document and the other was ratification of the authenticity of the document provided by adversary party. Second, the term of Jeon-Jun was originated from the meaning of official certification, but it was used as well in the meaning of one party’s ratification of the authenticity of the document provided by adversary party because of the similarity. How could it be done? The core element of the term, Jeon-Jun was ratification, so I think that Jeoson people gave the term two different meanings. Hence we should pay attention to the term carefully when the term appears. Third, the meaning of the formally stipulated manner and procedure (依官式) and the meaning of violation of the formally stipulated manner and procedure (違端) should be studied more.