Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:15:38.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Law and Custom under the Chosŏn Dynasty and Colonial Korea: A Comparative Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2007

Marie Seong-Hak Kim
Get access

Abstract

A number of Korean legal historians have argued that Chosŏn Korea had a tradition of customary law and that it was suppressed and distorted by the Japanese during the colonial period. But a comparison of Korean “custom” with that in late medieval France, where the legal concept of customary law developed, reveals that custom as a judicial norm was absent in premodern Korea. The Korean “customary law” that has been postulated as a true source of private law in Korean historiography was the invention of the Japanese colonial jurists. The Japanese collected Korea's popular usages that were supposed to serve as an antecedent for a modern civil law, and colonial judges employed the legal instrument of custom in reordering Korean practices into a modern civil legal framework. In colonial Korea, custom played the role of an intermediary regime between tradition and the demands of modern civil law.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , November 2007 , pp. 1067 - 1097
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Asami, Rintarō. 1921. “Chōsen hōkei no lekisi teki kenkyū” [A Historical Study of the Chosŏn Legal System]. Hōgaku kyōkai zasshi 39 (8): 26–67.Google Scholar
Baker, Edward. 1979. “The Role of Legal Reforms in the Japanese Annexation and Rules of Korea, 1905–1919.” In Studies on Korea in Transition, ed. David, R. McCann, John, Middleton, and Edward, J. Shultz, 17–42. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Center for Korean Studies.Google Scholar
de Beaumanoir, Philippe. 1899–1900. Coutumes de Beauvaisis [The Coutumes de Beauvaisis]. Paris: A. Picard et fils.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, Kathryn, and Philip, C. C. Huang, eds. 1994. Civil Law in Qing and Republican China. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgon, Jérôme. 1999. “La coutume et le droit en Chine à la fin de l'empire” [Custom and Law in Late Imperial China]. Annales HSS 54 (5): 1073–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgon, Jérô me. 2001. “Le droit coutumier comme phénomène d'acculturation bureaucratique au Japon et en Chine” [Customary Law as a Bureaucratic Acculturation Process in Japan and China]. In La coutume et la norme en Chine et au Japon [Custom and Norms in China and Japan], ed. Jérôme, Bourgon, 125–42. Saint-Denis: Presses universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Bourgon, Jérô me. 2002. “Uncivil Dialogue: Law and Custom Did Not Merge into Civil Law under the Qing.” Late Imperial China 23:50–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgon, Jérô me. 2004. “Rights, Freedoms, and Customs in the Making of Chinese Civil Law, 1900–1936.” In Realms of Freedom in Modern China, ed. William, C. Kirby, 84–102. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Chénon, Émile. 1926–29. Histoire générale du droit français public et privé des origins à 1815 [A General History of French Public and Private Laws from the Origin to 1815]. 2 vols. Paris: Sirey.Google Scholar
Cho, Yunsŏn. 2002. Chosŏn hugi sosong yŏngu [A Study of Litigations in the Late Chosŏn Period]. Seoul: Kukhak Charyowŏn.Google Scholar
Choi, PyŏngJu. 1938. “Minjirei jūichi cho no kanshū to sōsonken oyobi isaino sōzokuken” [Custom in Article 11 of the Civil Ordinance and the Eldest Grandson's Rights and the Widow's Succession Rights]. Shihō kyōkai zasshi 17 (1): 7–33.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Chonghyu. 1989. Kankoku minpōten no hikakuhō teki kenkyū [A Study of the Korean Civil Code from a Comparative Legal Perspective]. Tokyo: Sobunsha.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Kŭngsik, trans. 2000. Kaeyŏk p'an kwansŭp chosa pogosŏ [Revised Translation of Report on Investigations of Customs]. Seoul: Han'guk Pŏpche Yŏnguwŏn.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Kŭ ngsik. 2002. Han'guk pŏpchesa go [A Study of the History of Korean Law]. Seoul: Pagyŏngsa.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Kŭngsik, and Im, Sanghyŏk, eds. 1999. Simyuk segi sasong pŏpsŏ chipsŏng [Compilation of the Sixteenth-Century Civil Procedural Handbooks]. Seoul: Pŏpche Yŏnguwŏn.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Kŭngsik, and Chang, Ch'angmin, eds. 2004. Singminji gi sabŏp kwallyŏn charyo: Chosŏn Sabŏp Hyŏphoe Chapchi ŭi punsŏk [Materials Related to the Judicature during the Colonial Period: Analysis of The Journal of the Jurist Association]. Seoul: Han'guk Pŏpche Yŏnguwŏn.Google Scholar
Chŏng, Yagyong. 1969. Kugyŏk Mongmin simsŏ [Korean Translation of Mongmin simsŏ]. Seoul: Minjok Munhwa Ch'ujinhoe.Google Scholar
Chōsen Kōtō Hōin Anketsuroku [Law Reports of the Chosōn High Court]. 1908–43. Keijō [Seoul]: Kōtō hōin shokika.Google Scholar
Chōsen kōtō hōin hanrei yōshi ruishū [Summary Law Reports of the Chosōn High Court]. 1937. Keijō [Seoul]: Shihō Kyōkai.Google Scholar
Chōsen, Sōtokufu. 1935. Chōsen no shihō seido [The Judicial System of Chosōn]. Keijō [Seoul]: Chōsen Sōtokufu Hōmukoku Hōmuka.Google Scholar
Chōsen Sōtokufu, Chūsūin. 1938. Chōsen kyūkan seido chōsa jigyō gaiyō [Summary Report on Investigations of the Korean Old Customary System]. Keijō [Seoul]: Chōsen Sōtokufu Chūsūin.Google Scholar
Wangjo Sillok, Chosŏn [The Annals of the Chosŏn Dynasty], ed. P'yŏnch'an Wiwŏnhoe, Kuksa [National Historical Compilation Committee]. http://sillok.history.go.kr [accessed September 10, 2007].Google Scholar
Church, William F. 1941. Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Deuchler, Martina. 1977. “The Tradition: Women during the Yi Dynasty.” In Virtues in Conflict: Tradition and Korean Women Today, ed. Sandra, Mattielli, 1–47. Seoul: Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
Deuchler, Martina. 1992. The Confucian Transformation of Korea: A Study of Society and Ideology. Cambridge, Mass.: Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Deuchler, Martina. 2002. “The Practice of Confucianism: Ritual and Order in Chosŏn Dynasty Korea.” In Rethinking Confucianism: Past and Present in China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam, eds. Benjamin, A. Elman, John, B. Duncan and Herman, Ooms, 293–334. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Asia Pacific Monograph Series.Google Scholar
Filhol, René. 1937. Le Premier président Christofle de Thou et la réformation des coutumes [First President Christofle de Thou and the Reformation of Customary Law]. Paris: Librairie du Recueil Sirey.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Peter. 1984. “Traditionalism and Traditional Law.” Journal of African Law 28:20–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geny, François. 1932. Méthode d'interprétation et sources en droit privé positif [Method of Interpretation and Sources in Positive Private Law]. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Paris: Librarie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence.Google Scholar
Glenn, H. Patrick. 1997. “The Capture, Reconstruction and Marginalization of ‘Custom.’ ” American Journal of Comparative Law 45:613–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, H. Patrick. 2000. Legal Traditions of the World: Sustainable Diversity in Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gragert, Edwin. 1994. Landownership under Colonial Rule: Korea's Japanese Experience, 1900–1935. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahm, Pyong-choon. 1967. Korean Political Tradition and Law: Essays in Korean Law and Legal History. Seoul: Hollym.Google Scholar
Hahm, Pyong- choon. 1986. Korean Jurisprudence, Politics and Culture. Seoul: Yonsei University Press.Google Scholar
Hilaire, Jean. 1994. La vie du droit: Coutumes et droit écrit [The Life of the Laws: Custom and Written Law]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Philip C. C. 1996. Civil Justice in China: Representation and Practice in the Qing. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Philip C. C. 2001. Code, Custom, and Legal Practice in China: The Qing and the Republic Compared. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Im, Sanghyŏk. 2000. “Chosŏn ch'ŏn'gi minsa sosong kwa sosong iron ŭi chŏngae” [Civil Litigations in the Early Chosŏn Dynasty and the Development of Litigation Theories]. PhD diss., Seoul National University.Google Scholar
Jacob, Robert. 2001. “La coutume, les mœurs et le rite: Regards croisés sur les catégories occidentales de la norme non écrite” [Custom, Mores, and Rites: Western Categories of Unwritten Norms from a Cross-Cultural Perspective]. In La coutume et la norme en Chine et au Japon [Custom and Norms in China and Japan], ed. Jérôme, Bourgon, 145–66. Saint-Denis: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Kanshū chōsa hōkokusho [Report on Investigations of Customs]. 1910. Keijō [Seoul]: Chōsen Sōtokufu.Google Scholar
Karasawa, Yasuhiko, Philip, C. C. Huang, Shiga, Shūzō, and Terada, Hiroaki. 1998. “Kōki teisei Chūoku ni okeru hō, shakai, bunka” [Law, Society, and Culture in Late Imperial China]. Chūgoku-shakai to bunka 13:193–281.Google Scholar
Kelley, Donald R. 1990. “?‘Second Nature’: The Idea of Custom in European Law, Society, and Culture.” In The Transmission of Culture in Early Modern Europe, eds. Grafton, Anthony and Blair, Ann, 131–72. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Ilmi. 1973. “Chosŏn hugi chaesan sangsok kwansŭp–Ilche ha ku kwansŭp chosa pogosŏ rŭl chungshim ŭro” [Inheritance Practice in the Last Half Period of the Chosŏn Dynasty—Based on the Old Custom Survey Reports]. Idae sawŏn 11:33–52.Google Scholar
Kim, Marie Seong-Hak. 2004a. “Christophe de Thou et la réformation des coutumes: L'esprit de réforme juridique au XVIe siècle” [Christophe de Thou and the Reformation of Customary Law: The Spirit of Legal Reform in the Sixteenth Century]. Tijdschrift voor rechtsgeschiedenis [Legal History Review] 72:91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Marie Seong- Hak. 2004b. “Customary Constitutional Law.” Korea Times, November 11.Google Scholar
Kim, Marie Seong- Hak. 2007. “Custom, Community, and the Crown: Lawyers and the Reordering of French Customary Law.” In Between the Middle Ages and Modernity: Individual and Community in the Early Modern World, eds. Parker, Charles H. and Bentley, Jerry H., 169–86. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Kim, Marie Seong- Hak. Forthcoming. “Ume Kenjirō and the Making of Korean Civil Law, 1906–1910.” The Journal of Japanese Studies.Google Scholar
Kitō, Heiichi. 1936. Richōno zaisan sōzokuhō [A Study of Property Succession of the Yi Dynasty]. Keijō [Seoul]: Chōsen Sōtokufu Chūsūin.Google Scholar
Kōbun Ruishu [Collection of Official Documents]. n.d. Ajia Rekishi Shiryō Sentā [Japan Center for Asian Historical Records]. http://www.jacar.go.jp [accessed September 30, 2007].Google Scholar
Kohler, Joseph. 1886. “Ueber das Recht der Koreaner” [On Korean Law]. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 6:400–404.Google Scholar
Lambert, Édouard. 1903. La Fonction du droit civil comparé [The Function of Comparative Civil Law]. Paris: V. Girard et E. Brière.Google Scholar
Merryman, John Henry. 1969. The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Western Europe and Latin America. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Minji Kanshū kaitō Ishū [Compilation of the Replies regarding Civil Custom]. 1933. Keijō [Seoul]: Chōsen Sōtokufu Chūsūin.Google Scholar
Nomura, Chōtarō. 1927. “Chōsen ni okeru genkō no yōshi seido” [The Current Adoption System in Korea]. Shihō kyōkai zasshi 6 (4): 101–106.Google Scholar
Oka, Takashi. 1991. “Meiji minpō to Ume Kenjirō” [Meiji Civil Law and Ume Kenjirō]. Hōgaku shirin 88 (4): 3–47.Google Scholar
Okamatsu, Santarō. 1971. Provisional Report on Investigations of Laws and Customs in the Island of Formosa. Taipei: Ch'eng Wen.Google Scholar
Olivier-Martin, François. 1925. La coutume de Paris, Trait d'union entre le droit romain et les législations modernes [The Coutume de Paris, Link between Roman Law and Modern Legislation]. Paris: Recueil Sirey.Google Scholar
Olivier-Martin, Franç ois. 1997. Les lois du roi [The Laws of the King]. Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence. [Originally published in 1988.]Google Scholar
Pak, Pyŏngho. 1974. Han'guk pŏpchesa go [A Study of the History of Korean Law]. Seoul: Pŏpmunsa.Google Scholar
Pak, Pyŏngho. [Park Pyong-Ho]. 1976. “Characteristics in Traditional Korean Law.” Korea Journal 16(7): 4–16.Google Scholar
Pak, Pyŏngho. [Park Byoung Ho]. 1977. “Traditional Korean Society and Law.” Korean Journal of Comparative Law 5:1–26.Google Scholar
Pak, Pyŏngho. 1992. “Ilche ha ŭi kajok chŏngch'aek kwa kwansŭp pŏp hyŏngsŏng kwajŏng” [Family Policy and the Formation of Family Customary Law under the Period of Japanese Occupation]. Seoul Taehakkyo Pŏphak 33:1–17.Google Scholar
Peterson, Mark A. 1996. Korean Adoption and Inheritance: Case Studies in the Creation of a Classic Confucian Society. Ithaca, N.Y.: East Asian Program, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Pŏpwŏn Haengjŏngch'ŏ [The National Court Administration of Korea]. 1985. Ch'injok sangsok e kwanhan ku kwansŭp [Old Customs in Family and Succession Matters]. Seoul: Pŏpwŏn Haengjŏngch'ŏ.Google Scholar
Ranger, Terence. 1983. “The Invention of Tradition in Colonial Africa.” In The Invention of Tradition, eds. Hobsbawm, Eric and Ranger, Terence, 211–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sakai, Tadao. 1985. “Yi Yulgok and the Community Compact.” In The Rise of Neo-Confucianism in Korea, eds. Bary, de William Theodore and Haboush, JaHyun Kim, 323–48. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Conditions Have Failed. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Seizelet, Éric. 2001. “Contra legem ou Para legem? La coutume de l'union matrimoniale de fait en droit civil japonais avant 1945” [Contra Legem or Para Legem? De Facto Marriage as Custom in the Prewar Japanese Civil Law]. In La coutume et la norme en Chine et au Japon [Custom and Norms in China and Japan], ed. Jérôme, Bourgon, 125–42. Saint-Denis: Presses universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Shaw, William. 1973. “Traditional Korean Law: A New Look.” Korea Journal 13 (9): 40–53.Google Scholar
Shaw, William. 1980. “Traditional Korean Law and Its Relation to China.” In Essays on China's Legal Tradition, eds. Alan Cohen, Jerome, Randle Edwards, R., and Chang Chen, Fu-mei, 302–26. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shiga, Shūzō. 1984. Shindai Chūgoku no hō to saiban [Law and Adjudication in Qing China]. Tokyo: Sōbunsha.Google Scholar
Shin, Gi-Wook, and Michael, Robinson, eds. 1999. Colonial Modernity in Korea. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.Google Scholar
Shihō Kyōkai Zasshi [The Journal of the Jurist Association]. 1922–45. Keijō [Seoul]: Chosēn Shihō Kyōkai.Google Scholar
Sim, Hŭigi. 1997. Han'guk pŏpchesa kangŭi [Lectures on Korean Legal History]. Seoul: Samyŏngsa.Google Scholar
Sim, Hŭ igi. 2004. “Ilche kangjŏm ch'ogi singminji kwansŭp pŏp ŭi hyŏngsŏng” [The Establishment of Colonial Customary Law under Early Japanese Rule]. Pŏpsahak yŏngu 28:5–31.Google Scholar
Strauss, Gerald. 1986. Law, Resistance, and the State: The Opposition to Roman Law in Reformation Germany. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilgi, Sŭngjŏngwŏn [The Daily Records of Royal Secretariat of the Chosŏn Dynasty], ed. P'yŏnch'an Wiwŏnhoe, Kuksa [National Historical Compilation Committee]. http://sjw.history.go.kr [accessed September 10, 2007].Google Scholar
Tanabe, Kohji. 1963. “The Process of Litigation: An Experiment with the Adversary System.” In Law in Japan: The Legal Order in a Changing Society, ed. von Mehren, Arthur Taylor, 85–90. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, Tay-Sheng. 2000. Legal Reform in Taiwan under Japanese Colonial Rule, 1895–1945: The Reception of Western Law. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Watson, Alan. 1984. Sources of Law, Legal Change, and Ambiguity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, Alan. 2001. The Evolution of Western Private Law. Expanded, ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Woodman, Gordon. 1983. “How State Courts Create Customary Law in Ghana and Nigeria.” In Papers of the Symposia on Folk Law and Legal Pluralism, XIth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, Vancouver, Canada, August 19–23, 1983, ed. Harold, W. Finkler, 297–332. Ottawa, Ont.: Indian and Northern Affairs.Google Scholar
Yang, Kun. 1989. “Law and Society Studies in Korea: Beyond the Hahm Theses.” Law and Society Review 23:891–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yasuda, Kanta. 1936. “Sōzoku kaihuku seikyūken no honsitzu” [The Nature of Succession Recovery Claim]. Shihō kyōkai zasshi 15 (3): 1–32.Google Scholar
Yi, Ch'ŏlwu. 1991. “T'oji chosa saŏp kwa t'oji soyu pŏpche ŭi pyŏnch'ŏn” [The Land Survey Campaign and the Changes in the Landownership System]. In Han'guk pŏpsahak nonch'ong, 349–70. Seoul: Pagyŏngsa.Google Scholar
Yi, Pyŏngsu. 1977. “Chosŏn minsaryŏng e kwanhayŏ: che sibilcho ŭi kwansŭp ŭl chungsim ŭro” [A Study of the Chosŏn Civil Ordinance: Art. 11 in Focus].” Pŏpsahak Yŏngu 4:649–76.Google Scholar
Yi, Sangwuk. 1986. “Han'guk sangsok pŏp ŭi sŏngmunhwa kwajŏng' [Historical Transition of the Codification of Korean Succession Law]. PhD diss., Kyŏngbuk National University.Google Scholar
Yi, Sangwuk. 1988. “Ilche ha hoju sangsok kwansŭp pŏp ŭi chŏngnip” [The Establishment of Household Headship System during the Colonial Period]. Pŏpsahak yŏngu 9:23–61.Google Scholar
Yi, Sangwuk. 1991. “Ilche ha chont'ong kajok pŏp ŭi waegok” [Distortion of Traditional Family Law under Japanese Rule]. In Han'guk pŏpsahak nonch'ong, 371–99. Seoul: Pagyŏngsa.Google Scholar
Yi, Sŭngil. 1999. “Ilche sidae ch'injok kwansŭp ŭi Pyŏnhwa wa chosŏn minsaryŏng e kwanhan yŏngu: chosŏn minsaryŏng che 11 cho che I ch'a kaejŏngan ŭl chungshim ŭro” [A Study on the Changes of Family Law Custom and the Chosŏn Civil Ordinance under Japanese Rule: The Second Revision of Art. 11 in Focus]. Han'gukhak Nonjip 33:161–97.Google Scholar
Yi, Sŭ ngil. 2003. “Chosŏn Ch'ongdokpu ŭi pŏpche chŏngch'aek e taehan yŏngu” [A Study on the Legislative Policy of the Chosŏn Government General: Focusing on the Codification of Article 11 ‘Customs’ of the Chosŏn Civil Ordinance.” PhD diss., Hanyang University.Google Scholar
Yi, Yŏngmi. 2005. Kankoku shihō seido to Ume Kenjirō [The Korean Legal System and Ume Kenjirō]. Tokyo: Hōsei Daīgaku Shuppankyoku.Google Scholar
Yoshida, Heijirō. 1923. “Chōsen ni okeru kanshū to minji hōki to no kankei” [Relations between Korean Custom and Civil Law Provisions]. Shihō kyōkai zasshi 2 (4): 1–28.Google Scholar
Yun, Taesŏng. 1991. “Ilche ŭi Han'guk kwansŭp chosa saŏp kwa minsa kwansŭp pŏp” [The Japanese Campaign of Korean Custom Investigations and Civil Customary Law]. Ch'angwŏndae Nonmunjip 19 (1): 65–108.Google Scholar