KJCKorea
Journal Central

By examining the development of the “struggle for memory” and the issue of reconciliation surrounding the 1980 Sabuk Uprising, this study demonstrates that the memory and historicization of state violence cannot be concluded through simple reconciliation or closure. Under the media censorship and political denial of the military regime, the Sabuk Uprising was long stigmatized as a “riot,” and the reality of state violence remained concealed. However, since the 2000s, through the testimonies and activism of miner victims, the truths of state violence—including torture and illegal detention—have gradually surfaced, confirming the state’s responsibility. In this process, new conflicts have emerged regarding the historicization and memory of the event; in particular, the “lynching incident” that occurred during the uprising and the subsequent discourse on “reconciliation” have become central points of contention. Recently, the film 1980 Sabuk has raised public awareness and brought the uprising into the political spotlight, yet it fails to fully encapsulate the complexities of memory and reconciliation. The retrials and restoration of honor for the victims are still ongoing, and an official state apology has yet to be issued. Meanwhile, efforts to remember the uprising continue at the local level through films, educational activities, and commemorative projects. The writing of the history of the Sabuk Uprising cannot be completed simply through legal acquittals or formal acts of reconciliation. Acknowledging the limitations of reaching an absolute truth, the very process of continuously recording and remembering the human lives and suffering within is the true essence of history. By re-examining the Sabuk Uprising from various perspectives, this study calls for the state’s accountability for its past violence and seeks to provide a reflective opportunity for our society to establish a productive relationship with its tragic past.

This study investigates the process of “structural oblivio” in South Korean society, focusing on the Sewol Ferry disaster. It argues that the forgetting of social catastrophes is not a natural erosion caused by the passage of time, but rather a deliberate outcome driven by specific rhetorical strategies and spatial arrangements. The author analyzes how the state and media frame disasters as mere “accidents” to absolve the government of responsibility and transform the mourning of victims into a private financial matter through the rhetoric of “compensation,” thereby othering the victims as “impure.” This mechanism of structural oblivion has repeatedly surfaced from maritime disasters following the liberation to the recent Itaewon tragedy, systematically neutralizing social memory through deliberately induced “empathy fatigue” and the hierarchical competition between different disasters. Furthermore, this paper examines how such structural oblivion is closely intertwined with the decontextualized placement of the “space for the dead” in South Korean society. The taboo of death, reinforced by hygiene and economic logic since the Japanese colonial period, has concealed and isolated spaces of mourning from the realm of daily life. Consequently, memorial facilities for disasters such as the Seongsu Bridge collapse or the Sampoong Department Store collapse have been relegated to desolate areas or downgraded to “safety monuments” stripped of their original context. In conclusion, this study emphasizes that the oblivion of social disasters is a structural phenomenon resulting from the combination of prepared rhetoric and spatial politics that erase the “placeness” of death. Recognizing this structure is the essential first step toward practicing “active memory” for the well-being of the community.

This article reexamines the operation of Poheum (逋欠: tax arrears) in the Goryeo dynasty and explores its fiscal significance. Poheum referred to uncollected revenues that had not been paid by a certain point in time. Rather than representing simple tax delinquency, it functioned as a fiscal item that was administratively recorded and managed within the state’s financial system. Previous studies have mainly interpreted tax remissions recorded in the Relief for the Poor (賑恤) section of the Goryeosa (History of Goryeo) in connection with relief policies or benevolent governance. This study instead approaches these records from the perspective of fiscal administration. Historical sources indicate that the remission of Poheum was repeatedly implemented throughout the Goryeo period by clearing accumulated arrears according to specific chronological benchmarks. These measures concerned various forms of taxation, including Jo (租: land tax) and Gongbu (貢賦: tribute tax), and were often carried out in response to political transitions, disasters, and warfare. The evidence suggests that long-accumulated arrears were frequently difficult to recover in practice. Rather than pursuing aggressive collection that could generate administrative costs and social resentment, the Goryeo government periodically remitted arrears or postponed their collection. In this sense, the remission of Poheum should not be understood simply as fiscal failure or abandonment of revenue. Instead, it functioned as a mechanism for adjusting the gap between nominal revenues and actual collections. Poheum thus served as an institutional category through which the Goryeo state managed uncollected revenues, revealing the flexibility and practical operation of fiscal administration in the Goryeo dynasty.