초록 close

일제가 「조선귀족령」을 제정하고 귀족집단을 만들어 낸 것은 개항 이래 한국 침략 과정에서 얻은 경험을 토대로 한 것이었다. 이러한 경험을 통해 식민통치를 앞장 서 선전하고 정당화할 전위대로써 피지배민의 최상층인 조선귀족을 만들어 적극 이용한 것이다. 조선귀족이 식민통치에 모범적이지 않거나 忠順을 결여하는 등의 경우에는 「조선귀족령」의 몇 개 조항을 포괄적으로 적용해 작위를 削奪하였다. 그렇지만 명백한 위반자라고 하더라도 식민통치의 이용가치가 있으면 작위의 유지와 정지를 반복하면서 귀족신분을 누릴 수 있도록 배려했으며, 한편으로는 조선귀족의 명예나 일제 자신들의 권위·체면 등을 위해 사퇴를 권유하는 경우도 있었다. 작위를 받은 일이 일제 측의 일방적인 강요 때문이었다고 주장하기도 하지만, 작위 거절·거부 및 반납은 본인이 얼마든지 능동적으로 표현할 수 있었다. 때문에 최초 작위 수여자로 선정된 8명은 곧바로 작위를 거부·거절했으며, 또 일부는 이후 독립운동과 관련해 작위를 잃기도 했다. 3·1운동 등과 같은 독립운동이나 對日 저항운동 등 얼마든지 자신의 의사를 표현하거나 행동으로 참여할 수 있었던 것이다. 작위 수여자들의 반민족적인 매국행위는 그 자체로 ‘구체적인 행위’의 반증이 된다. 수작자 스스로도 이것이 강제병합 과정에 순응하고 협력한 대가였음을 밝히고 있기 때문이다. 그렇기에 해방 이후 친일파·민족반역자 등을 처벌하기 위해 각 정당이나 단체가 작성한 강령, 특히 제헌국회가 제정한 「반민족행위처벌법」은 수작자·습작자를 행위와 상관없이 ‘당연범’으로 규정해 처벌했던 것이다.


The reason why Japanese imperialism enacted the regulations of Korean nobles and made a noble group was based on its experience in the course of its invasion of Korea since the opening of a port. Through such an experience, it produced Korean nobles who were the uppermost class of the Korean subjugated people and actively took advantage of them as a vanguard to make them take the head in propagating Japanese colonial rule and justify it. When Korean nobles could not be the model case for its colonial rule or lacked in a sense of loyalty and obedience, it comprehensively applied several articles of the regulations of the Korean nobility to such a case and deprived them of their title of nobility. Nonetheless, in case that such a noble that violated regulations was of utility value for colonial rule,Japan gave consideration to him repeatedly making him maintain his title of nobility or suspending it. Meanwhile, there was a case that Japan imperialism persuaded Korean nobles to resign from their title of nobility for the honor of Korean nobles, dignity and reputation of Japanese imperialism. Korean nobles could conatively express their rejection or return of the peerage at any time. Therefore 8 persons who were selected as the first recipients of the peerage rejected accepting the tile of nobility at once. And some nobles were deprived of their title of nobility with regards to an independence movement. Thus they could express their intention or put their money where their mouth was at any time by participating in an independence movement or a resistance movement against Japan. Acceptance of the title of nobility itself proves the unpatriotic act of the title recipients of nobility against their own people because the recipients disclosed by themselves that the conferment was the price for their adaptation and cooperation in the course of the Japanese annexation of Korea. Therefore platforms prepared by each political party and social organizations, specially the law punishing those who committed crimes against their own people which was enacted by the Constituent National Assembly regarded the title recipients of nobility and hereditary peers as obvious criminals regardless their behavior and punished them.