Study of central managerial function is very important in the study of urban system, and the study of changing location of central managerial function and that of development process of urban system should be more studied, because urban system is always changing. This article investigates the location of central managerial function in main cities in Korea after the 1960s, taking account of the changes in accumulation and territory of economic and administrative central managerial functions. The results are as follows: 1. In the mid-1960s, four provincial capital cities with large population, Pusan, Taegu, Kwangju and Taejon, had already possessed larger administrative central managerial function than other cities, although there was not much difference in economic central managerial function among the provincial capital cities. 2. By the end of 1970s, the four larger provincial capital cities, Pusan, Taegu, Kwangju and Taejon, had strengthened their economic central managerial function. As a result, the territory of both economic and administrative central managerial functions of these cities covered more than one province, and we can distinguish these four cities as "regional central cities" from other cities. Among other cities, newly industrial cities such as Masan and Pohang strengthened their economic central managerial function, and Inchon and Cheju strengthened their administrative central managerial function. 3. At the beginning of the 1990s, the regional central cities further accumulated central managerial function, and have established their firm position in the Korean urban system. These cities are followed by smaller provincial capital cities or newly industrial cities, although the territories of central managerial function of these cities are limited within one province. 4. A hierarchical structure in the location of central managerial function is identified both in terms of accumulation and territory. Especially, the four regional central cities have grown rapidly under the influence of regional development policy of Korean government to establish a development center in each region. 5. Although there was much imbalance between the accumulation of economic central managerial function and that of administrative central managerial function in many Korean cities under Japanese colonial rule, these two functions have become more balanced after the 1960s, except the newly industrial cities which are much more specialized in the economic central managerial function than administrative one.

抄録全体を表示

　本稿は、朝鮮時代（一三九二～一九一〇）のうち、甲午改革（一八九四）以前を対象として、刑事法史の主要な研究について整理紹介し、現状の課題を提示するとともに、今後の可能性について展望するものである。まず、朝鮮時代の刑事法史研究の現在に至るまでの流れについて、一九世紀から植民地期を経て、解放後の

における成果をたどりながら、その特徴を概観した。第二に、朝鮮の法制定における中国法の位置付けに対する研究の現在点について、朝鮮が明律を受容した姿勢との関係から説明し、それを踏まえて第三に、明律とは異なる朝鮮独自の刑罰法が形成された事例として、盗罪に対する処罰と、私的復讐における減死を挙げた。第四に、刑事裁判に関係するいくつかの司法機関の成立過程と役割について述べ、第五に、訴冤、行刑および保放・赦を含めた刑事裁判手続の具体的内容について、刑曹の主導する一般的な断獄手続と、義禁府が国王の指示を受けて主宰する手続に区分して説明した。最後に、朝鮮刑事法史の課題と可能性について、地方の刑事裁判や軍人の犯罪に関する刑事裁判の実態解明の必要性、朝鮮刑事法史における時代区分の問題、そして刑事法にとどまらず、これまで蓄積された朝鮮法史の研究成果を世界中の研究者に発信する標準的入門書の必要性を提示した。

抄録全体を表示

This paper provides a historical analysis of the Special Permission for Residence (SPR), a discretionary measure of relief for undocumented immigrants in Japan until the 1970s, the period before the Japanese government signed the Refugee Convention. SPR deserves close attention in the sense that it has served as a strategic measure to make Japanese immigration system work for the authority’s purposes. According to the Immigration Bureau, decisions to grant permission are made from two apparently incompatible points of view, namely,“humanitarian considerations”and“national interests,”although it seems that the latter has always been given priority over the former in actual cases. It needs to be explained how this relief measure was incorporated and utilized in the postwar Japanʼs immigration control system.

The historical origin of the SPR in Japan was the relief measure during the Allied Occupation granted to illegalized immigrants, Korean in most cases, based on a petition submitted to the General Headquarters. After the restoration of sovereignty, as the South Korean government refused to accept deportees, the Japanese government reintroduced this relief measure, from an allegedly “humanitarian”standpoint, for those to be deported. Thus, the SPR functioned as a complement to postwar Japanʼs foreign policy of reincorporating itself into the international community while avoiding postcolonial responsibilities. On the other hand, the SPR was never applied to political refugees in spite of the existence of those seeking asylum in Japan. It was in this situation that three cases in court filed in the 1960s functioned as challenges to Japanʼs immigration policy. The results of these cases showed that Japanʼs immigration authority was never tolerant of any substantial restrictions to its large discretionary power over immigrants.

Namely, the authority succeeded in reversing the judgement to restrict its discretionary power by a particular international norm, a political offense exception in extradition, whereas it did not strongly resist the judgement to restrict its discretionary power by an universal but abstract humanitarian principle.

抄録全体を表示