米国의 対日占領政策과 在日韓人의 経済的 権利 (The Occupation of Japan by U.S.A and the Economical Right of Koreans in Japan)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한일민족문제학회
· 수록지 정보 : 韓日民族問題硏究 / 23호 / 259 ~ 304페이지
· 저자명 : 김태기

초록

この研究は(1)米国政府の解放後在日韓人に対する保護および生活に関する経済政策,(2)SCAPの在日韓人の経済的な権利(持参金,雇用,特別配給,生活保護法,財産税など)に対する政策について考察した。米国政府の在日韓人経済政策において,日本の植民地支配の犠牲者としての在日韓人に対する経済的配慮を見つけることができない。米国政府の政策的な立場が明確であったならば,在日韓人の経済的な権利に対するSCAPの態度も変わったはずである。しかし,米国政府の在日韓人に対する経済政策は在日韓人に決して友好的なものではなかった。結局,SCAPが在日韓人を経済的にどのように認識したかということが重要であるが,最も重要な担当部局であるESSの担当者は,在日韓人の植民地支配からの解放がどのような意味を持っていたのか理解しようとしなかった。むしろ在日韓人は日本の侵略戦争に積極的に協力し,富を蓄積したという認識を持っていたし,在日韓人は植民地支配の犠牲者ではなく,日本人と同じ侵略者であり,解放された後,自分たちの立場を急に変えた裏切り者と見なした。解放初期の無秩序な状況の中で,敗戦に失望に陥っている日本人とは対照的に解放を喜んで,日本社会から解放された民族として,自由に行動し,場合によっては,日本の公権力さえ無視する在日韓人をSCAPは否定的に見ていた。SCAPに在日韓人は日本経済にとって負担になる存在であり,経済的に特に配慮する価値のない存在であった。在日韓人という解放民族が長い間日本の植民地支配を受けてきた被害者であるという認識と政策が彼らに完全に欠けていたため,SCAPは現実的な立場のみに立って,日本を統治する支配者,すなわち日本政府を代弁する統治者の立場から在日韓人問題を見,経済的な権利についてもそのような立場で対処した。彼らの政策のの基準は日本の政治,経済,社会秩序の維持であり,反共という政策であった。これらのSCAPの方針が反映されて,在日韓人の持参金は制限され,雇用は差別され,特別配給も受けられなかった。生活保護法も限られた人々のみ対象となり,財産税を納付しなければならなかった。結局,在日韓人の生活は改善されず,日本社会の中で安定した生計手段を見つけることができなかった。結局多くの在日韓人は生計のため占領後も違法な商行為をした。日本政府はこれを弾圧し,在日韓人はこれに抵抗した。

영어초록

This paper is to review (1) the U.S. government’s basic recognition and policy about the economical problems of Koreans in Japan after World War Ⅱ and (2) SCAP(General Headquarters of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers)’s policies concerning the economical rights(Property Individuals to carry on Living Japan, Employment Supplementary, Ration, Livelihood Protection Law, Capital Levy etc.)of Koreans in Japan during Occupation Period.
First of all, the policies of U.S government over economical problems of Koreans in Japan was limited to only in basic protection and support. In addition, there were no consideration of economical rights of Koreans in Japan who were liberalized after Japan’s colonization. U.S. government’s economical policy to Koreans in Japan was　not amicable at all to Koreans in Japan. If U.S. government had ordered specific direct on the employment and public assistance toward Koreans in Japan, SCAP would have handled economical rights of Koreans in Japan based on U.S. government’s keynote. Based on no specific direct, SCAP in the end, decided economical rights of Koreans in Japan based on their own judgement. After all, how SCAP perceive Koreans in Japan and economical rights of Koreans in Japan became important. Related to economical rights of Koreans in Japan, the most profound Section ESS(Economic and Scientific Section), never tried to understand the existence of Koreans in Japan who were liberated from colonization of Japan. Rather, they had a prejudice that Koreans in Japan positively cooperated Japan’s invading war and accumulated wealth, that they were not the victim of colonization, that they were the same invader as Japan, and regarded them as apostates who changed their footings post liberation.
SCAP looked negatively at Koreans in Japan who were congratulating the liberation and who, as a independent nation, acted freely, at times ignoring the government power of Japan in contrast to Japanese who were bitterly disappointed at defeat in the chaos of early days of liberation. They saw that Koreans in Japan accumulated great wealth by commercial transaction illegally during the economical disorder after defeat of Japan.
As a result SCAP regarded that Koreans in Japan was a burden to Japan economy and had no need to specially consider them. This perception actively speaks for Japan government. SCAP had a distorted understanding of historical background of Koreans in Japan’s existence and realistic situation that Koreans in Japan are in. They looked at the economical problem of Koreans in Japan in the standpoint of governor as substitute of Japanese government. Their basis of policy was the maintenance of politic, economy, social order and anti-Communism of Japan. As a reflection of this policy of SCAP, Koreans in Japan’s property individuals to carry on living Japan was limited, employee discrimination to them was not solved. And they could not get supplementary ration and livelihood protection was limited to only some of Koreans in Japan. Further more, they had to pay a property tax. The poverty life of Koreans in Japan did not get any better, they could not find stable means of making a living in Japan society. As a result, Koreans in Japan continued illegal commercial transaction. Japanese government oppressed it and Koreans in Japan resisted.

참고자료

· 없음