earticle

영어

Prohibition of Interest and Debt Relief in the Eraof Nehemiah and King MunmuJoong Ho Chong, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Christian StudiesKeimyung UniversityIn Ancient Israel there existed the laws which prohibits charging interestand commands debt relief(Exod 22:24-26; Lev 25:35-38; Deut 23:20-21),and also the law which orders the remission of debt after 7 years(Deut15:1-3). Debates have existed as to whether these startling enactments,which had a power to freeze economic relations instantly, were actuallyenforced, and whether these were realistic measures or not. This article compares the cases of Nehemiah(Neh 5:1-13) with thoseof King Munmu of the ancient Shilla dynasty, who had implemented suchlaws. This article seeks to unveil the motivation and purpose lying behindthese institutions. The motivation lying behind prohibition of interest-charge and debtrelief can be summarized as follows. 1) Relief measures sought to savedebt slaves, who, after having taken out loans because of poverty andstarvation, fell into slavery. Natural disasters rendered them unable topay back their debts. 2) The monarch sought to weaken the power of thepolitical rivals and on the other hand to increase the power of the throneor ruling leadership by implementing the law of prohibiting interest andthe law of debt relief. 3) Prohibition of interest and debt relief signaled‘brotherly love’and served as a mechanism of social unification. Further,these laws served as a method by which the poor could be helped whilepreserving their honor and dignity. Therefore, while on surface level prohibition of interest and debt reliefmade little economic sense, in terms of political perspective and socialunity, these laws not only were realistic but also served a purpose, that isto cure previous economic illnesses and produce a healthier economy. Theunderstanding that such treatment was necessary to prevent communitybreakdown spurred members to enact such institutions. Also, the implementation of such laws was be made possible by thelimited enactment in certain sectors, which is analogous to a partial andlimited treatment of a particular disease, rather than all-out enactmentthroughout the entire economy. Therefore, we can conclude thatprohibition of interest and debt relief are realistic policies, capable ofbeing implemented according to need.

한국어

본 논문의 목적은 느헤미야와 신라의 문무왕이 시행한 이자금지와 채무면제사건을 비교하면서 이러한 사건이 왜 일어났는지 그 동기와 목적을 찾아 밝히는것이다. 동시에 구약의 이자금지와 채무 면제법이 시행하기 힘든 이상적인 목표로만 존재하는 것이 아니라 실제로 현실 사회 속에서 시행할 수 있는 법령임을 확인할 것이다.