본 논문은 치안유지법 제정 직후 동 법이 식민지 조선에서 어떠한 논리와 형식으로 적용되었는가를 분석하는 것을 목표로 하여 고려공산당 조직 사건으로 구속된 정재달 등에 대해 제령7호를 적용한 예심 및 1심판결문과 1926년에서 27년 사이에 이루어진 치안유지법 위반 사건 14개에 대한 판결문 19개를 분석하였다. 치안유지법이 제정된 직후 이를 적극적으로 적용하자는 주장이 있었음에도 불구하고 1925년까지는 독립운동과 관련한 특정한 행위에 대해 제령7호와 치안유지법 중 어느 것을 적용할 것인가 하는 기준이 분명하게 마련되지 않았다. 그러나 1926년경에 이루어진 민족주의 계열의 독립운동관련 사건에 대한 재판에서 조선의 독립운동이 곧 국체변혁에 해당한다고 하는 논리가 적용되고 있으나 일반화 되었다고 보기는 어렵고 사건의 특징을 고려하여 선별적으로 판단하였다. 그러나 사회주의 이론에 기초한 독립운동에 대해서는 국체변혁의 논리가 적용되지 않고 치안유지법 제정의 기본 취지에 따라서 사유재산제도의 부정을 근거로 동 법을 적용하고 있다. 1927년 이후가 되면 판결문 속에 피고의 어떠한 행위가 국체의 변혁이나 사유재산제도의 부정에 해당되는지 구체적으로 언급하지 않고 있을 뿐만 아니라 치안유지법 위반에 해당하지 않는다고 보이는 사건에 대해서도 동 법을 확대 적용하고 있는 사례가 증가하고 있다.

This paper aims to analyse how the Public Peace Maintenance Law had been applied to the Chosun colonial society. For this purpose, I have examined 19 judicial cases allegedly infringing the above mentioned law including the decision of the preliminary and the first trial of Jeong Jae-Dal(who had been arrested for the Korea Communist Party organization case) and judgements on the 14 cases in 1926 and 1927. In spite of strong voice supporting the strict and active application of the Public Peace Maintenance Law immediately after its enactment, there was no certain canon until 1925 whether to apply the Royal Edict No. 7 or the Public Peace Maintenance Law to independence-relating cases. In the case of an independent movement by nationalists in 1926, we can find a logic that the independent movement in Chosun meant an effort to convert the national polity. But this kind of logic was far from applying to every similar case. Each case was judged according to its nature and character. It was noticeable that the logic of converting the national polity was never applied to independent movement based on socialism, Instead, it was applied that the Public Peace Maintenance Law which provided a basis for the denial of the private ownership system. After 1927 decision of the court did not specify whether the accused acted contrary to national policy or against the private property system. Besides there was tendency to extend the Public Peace Maintenance Law. The cases against the Public Peace Maintenance Law were increasing to the extent of applying to the case which was not appropriate.

This paper aims to analyse how the Public Peace Maintenance Law had been applied to the Chosun colonial society. For this purpose, I have examined 19 judicial cases allegedly infringing the above mentioned law including the decision of the preliminary and the first trial of Jeong Jae-Dal(who had been arrested for the Korea Communist Party organization case) and judgements on the 14 cases in 1926 and 1927. In spite of strong voice supporting the strict and active application of the Public Peace Maintenance Law immediately after its enactment, there was no certain canon until 1925 whether to apply the Royal Edict No. 7 or the Public Peace Maintenance Law to independence-relating cases. In the case of an independent movement by nationalists in 1926, we can find a logic that the independent movement in Chosun meant an effort to convert the national polity. But this kind of logic was far from applying to every similar case. Each case was judged according to its nature and character. It was noticeable that the logic of converting the national polity was never applied to independent movement based on socialism, Instead, it was applied that the Public Peace Maintenance Law which provided a basis for the denial of the private ownership system. After 1927 decision of the court did not specify whether the accused acted contrary to national policy or against the private property system. Besides there was tendency to extend the Public Peace Maintenance Law. The cases against the Public Peace Maintenance Law were increasing to the extent of applying to the case which was not appropriate.

, , , , , ,

Public Peace Maintenance Law, National Policy, Private Ownership System, Decision, Royal Edict No. 7, Nationalism, Socialism