Earticle

송광유 고변사건은 국왕 인조의 재위 기간 초반에 발생한 사건이다. 이 사 건은 1628년(인조 6) 12월 17일에 전라도 남원에 사는 송광유가 일부 호남 선 비들의 역모를 고발하면서 시작되었다. 송광유로 인해 총 31명이 연루되어 심문을 받았다. 그러나 조사 과정에서 송광유가 허위로 고발한 사실들이 드 러나면서, 결국 무고(誣告) 사건으로 판결났다. 본 논문에서는 첫째, 조선시대 17세기 초반을 살았던 송광유라는 인물에 대해 탐색을 했다. 둘째, 송광유가 일으킨 무고 사건을 처리하는 국왕과 신하 들의 입장 차이를 검토하는데 주목했다. 먼저 송광유의 고변 동기 이면에는 좋아하는 관비 후양춘을 속량(贖良)하고 싶었던 송광유의 욕심에서부터 시작 되었다. 이 욕심은 공신이 되고 싶은 욕망으로 연결되었다. 즉 송광유는 공을 세우는 수단으로 고변을 이용한 것이었다. 결과적으로는 송광유가 거짓으로 고발한 정황이 수사 과정에서 밝혀졌다. 그러나 사건을 처리하는 과정을 보면 국왕과 신하 사이에서 송광유 처벌에 대한 입장 차이가 극명히 대립한다. 최고 권력자인 국왕 인조의 입장에서는 송광유의 고발 내용에 어느 정도 사실 관계가 있음이 중요했다. 반면 신하들 은 송광유의 허위 사실 제보 측면에 집중했다. 그러나 송광유 처벌에 대한 최종 결정권은 국왕 인조에게 있었다. 이런 점에서 국왕 인조가 송광유 처벌을 반대한 근원적 이유를 탐구함으로 써 허위 사실 고발자에 대한 인조의 생각의 일면을 분석해보고자 했다. 이는 인조 재위 기간 내내 벌어지는 역모 사건에 대해, 인조가 어떤 생각을 가지 고 사건을 대처하는지 살펴볼 수 있는 단초가 될 것이기 때문이다.

The accusation of treason filed by Song Gwang-yu occurred in the early part of King Injo's reign. The case began on December 17, 1628 (6th year of King Injo’s reign), when Song Gwang-yu, who was living in Namwon, Jeolla-do, accused a few intellectuals in Jeolla-do of treason. A total of 31 people were interrogated for this charge. However, in the course of the investigation, facts proving that Song Gwang-yu made a false accusation were revealed, and eventually it was ruled as a false accusation. First, this paper explored the figure named Song Gwang-yu who lived in the early 17th century of the Joseon Dynasty. Second, this paper focused on examining the difference between the position of the king and his subjects in handling the case of false charge made by Song Gwang-yu. First, the motive behind Song Gwang-yu's accusation was his desire to liberate the female servant he liked and elevate her to a commoner. This desire led to the ambition to become a subject who performed a meritorious deed for the king. In other words, he brought the accusation as a means to perform a meritorious deed. Finally, the circumstances of Song Gwang-yu's false accusation were revealed during the investigation. However, the process of handling the case shows a stark difference in opinion between the king and his subjects on the punishment of Song Gwang-yu. From the perspective King Injo, the supreme power, it was important that Song Gwang-yu's accusation contained some truth. On the other hand, the king’s subjects focused on the aspect that Song Gwang-yu reported false information. However, the final decision on Song's punishment rested with King Injo. By exploring the ulterior reasons for King Injo’s opposition to the punishment of Song Gwang-yu, this paper tried to figure out some aspects of the king’s thoughts on the false accuser. This will provide a clue to understand how King Injo thought and responded to the treason cases that occurred throughout his reign.

The report of Jeong Yeo-Rip's treason plot to the authorities in 1589 came from the Hwanghae-do province, not from the Jeolla-do province where he lived. The reason was that in the Hwanghae-do province Westerners(Seoin) outnumbered Easterners(Dongin), and that the Song Ik-Pil brothers resorted to trickery, who were degraded to a low rank of servant and secluded there by the Dongin. Therefore, the incident was not the plain plot of the treason, but the massacre from the fabricated plot of treason on Jeong Yeo-Rip, where Jeong Cheol and Song Ik-Pil took the lead in purging the Dongin. There is an opinion that Jeong Yeo-Rip's treason plot was real, but I think that the analysis of the related evidences shows that the contention was illogical, so it was a pure fabrication. The plot began from Yang Cheon-Hoe's memorial to the throne at Jeong Cheol's instigation, and escalated to the massacre with Jeong Jip's written statement, Nakan's scholar Son Hung-Bok's statement and Jeong Am-Su's memorial to the throne. Most of the concerned men were tortured to death before the conclusion of the judgement. The investigation was to get rid of the political rivals and the mortal enemies, not to find out the truth of the affair. King Sonjo have to share the responsibility with the Dongin for the deterioration of the situation, because he passively dealt with the plot, to leave Jeong Cheol in full charge of the judgement. It was not long before he dismissed Jeong Cheol of his office and deported him, to the result of the establishment of the Dongin government. This was to heighten the dependence of the factions upon the king himself. And the incident occurred at the early stage of the factional strife in the Joseon political scene. In this light, the disadvantages, not the advantages, of the faction politics should be examined a little more. According to the current theory of the faction politics, the political history of the late Joseon have been explained by the way of the symmetrical dichotomy, such as Padang or Bungdang. But the theory cannot explain the political scene after the conflict of the Dongin and the Seoin. The massacre of 1589 left many wrong heritages. Factional strife became hereditary, and the diversity of the thought was more suppressed, and the Dongin began to diverge into the Namin and the Bukin. Moreover the incident became a precedent of the intrigue and the murder to purge political rivals, and to seize the political power. Finally it was not real that the incident had an unfavorable influence upon the Jeolla-do province. There were no disadvantages against the hometown of Jeong Yeo-Rip from the government, which in turn proves the fabrication of his treason plot.

본고는 唐宋元·高麗의 十惡 중 모반죄의 구성요건과 형벌체계를 비교·분석하여 그 異同點을 導出하였다. 『당률소의』에서는 모반죄의 구성요건으로서 “황제를 위해하려고 꾀한 행위”에 대한 형벌, 즉 主刑의 경우, 共犯者는 모두 斬首刑에 처해졌다. 이밖에 『당률소의』에서는 모반죄에 대하여 여러 가지 처벌상의 특례로서 緣坐･沒官의 광범위한 적용, 赦免의 배제와 除名의 적용, 特典의 배제, 재판절차로서 告(고소･고발)의 허용 등을 인정하였고, 기타 처벌상의 특례(戶籍의 同異의 不制限, 首從의 不區分, 三審制의 不適用, 一覆奏 등)도 규정하였다. 게다가 이들 처벌상의 특례는 그 적용되는 범위가 모반죄에 국한되는 부문도 있지만, ‘謀叛 以上(謀反･謀大逆･謀叛)’처럼 그 성격상 국가(皇帝)권력의 지배질서(君臣의 大義)에 저촉되는 범죄를 포괄하는 경우가 일반적이고, 十惡 전체에 적용되는 특례도 있다. 그런데 唐 후기(德宗 연간)에는 十惡 가운데 중대 범죄 ‘謀叛 이상’에서 ‘惡逆 이상’(=모반謀反·모대역謀大逆·모반謀叛·악역)으로 확대되었고, 그 외의 범죄에 대한 형벌로서 ‘重杖處死刑’이라는 刑名이 출현하고 있다. 또한 이들 규정은 『송형통』에 정식 조문으로 법제화되고 있다. 게다가 전자의 경우에는 『경원조법사류』에 보이듯이, 太宗 雍熙 2年(985) 9월에 十惡 중 惡逆 이상으로 死刑에 이른 자는 유형 2천리에 처하고 대사면령이 있으면 사면되고 있는 것에서도 확인된다. 이로써 『당률소의』로 대표되는 唐 전기 모반죄의 구성요건과 형벌체계가 당 후기에 이르러 변화되기 시작했고, 그러한 변화가 법제화 과정을 거쳐 송대에 계승되었음을 알 수 있다. 한편, 南宋 英宗代(1207) 吳曦의 反逆 議罪를 詳看하여 올린 趙善堅 등의 狀奏文과 그에 대하여 확정 판결을 내린 英宗의 詔書에 보이는 내용을 통하여 모반죄에 대한 형벌규정상의 실태 및 모반죄와 반역죄에 대한 처벌상의 차이를 엿볼 수 있다. 첫째, 趙善堅 등의 狀奏에 제시된 모반죄에 대한 처벌은 “➀범죄자는 참수형, ➁父·子 나이 16세 이상은 교수형, ➂백숙부와 형제의 子는 유형 3천리, ➃15세 이하 및 母女·妻妾·祖孫·형제·姉妹는 沒官한다”로 되어 있는데, 이는 『당률소의』·『송형통』과 대체로 일치한다. 그러나 趙善堅 등이 이 법이 존재하지만 사용되지 않았다고 하는 표현에서 영종대(남송)에는 본 법이 사문화되었음을 알 수 있다. 둘째, 反逆으로 疑罪된 吳曦의 案件에 대한 英宗의 조서를 보면, 主刑으로서 叛逆人 吳曦의 族屬을 誅戮刑에 처하지만, 주목되는 것은 처벌상의 특례로서 主犯(吳曦)의 妻와 16세 이상의 남자는 重杖處死刑에 처하고, 15세 이하 및 모녀·처첩·조손·형제·자매 등은 兩廣의 遠惡州軍으로 編管시키고 있는 점이다. 이 중 重杖處死刑은 『송형통』에서 정식 형벌로 入律된 점을 반영한 것이지만, 후자의 편관형은 기존에 없는 형벌이다. 특히 후자는 처벌상의 특례에서 移配를 적용하지 않은 점, 赦免令이 있어도 歸還에서 배제한 점 등과 함께 남송대에 새로이 입법화된 규정이다. 그리고 『송사』「형법지」에는 모반죄와 관련된 처벌상의 특례로서 십악죄의 경우에 移配시키는 않는다는 규정과 집행절차로서 매월 2월 天慶節에 형을 집행한다는 규정이 보인다. 전자의 경우 『송회요집고』에도 보이기 때문에 이 규정은 송대에 십악에 대한 처벌상의 특례 ...

In the case of the prisoner, all accomplices were subjected to the death sentence for the crimes of death. In addition, there are various kinds of punishment exemption for the accused crime including exclusion of privilege, exemption of amnesty, exclusion of privilege, acceptance of accusation as trial procedure, etc. Discrimination, injustice, disqualification of the species, non-application of the third principle, and Ilbokju were also prescribed. In addition, most of the cases in which these punishments are covered include the form of "Moban Yeosang". On the other hand, in the New Testament "criminal law", major crimes are enlarged to "more than bad", and the name of "heavy caretaker death sentence" appears as punishment for other crimes. It is noted that these two are officially legislated into Songhyeongtong. However, when the South Song Dynasty was reached, this law was enacted, and the existing regulations such as the appearance of the Pyeonkwanheong, the ignorance of the Eibae, even when the amnesty was issued, the regulations that had not existed before appeared such as refusal. The constitutional requirement of the rebellion guilt prescribed in the yarn "criminal law magazine" is followed by the sacrificial rituals of the prisoners in Tangryulso. However, in punishment for the sins of the rebellion, it is characterized by distinguishing between the main criminal and the sub criminal. However, in the case of Koryo Rule, each of them is also divided and distributed to Haeju Island, Hwacheon, Bugok, Gokseong, Chungcheon, and Chungbuk. In addition, Yakyeok Yeosang is excluded from Keupga, and Wallreoyul is applied to the execution of the slaves. Thus, the Koryo government defines the serious crimes including the rebellion as Yakyeok Yeosang in the Goryeo period, which is consistent with the intrinsic development of China in the Goryeo period. However, as a special case of punishment, as an exception to punishment, the characteristics of consideration are also seen, such as the exclusion from Keupga and the application of Wallreoyul.

This paper described the whole story and background about Kim Hong-won's exile in 1629 that was caused by the information of his concubine, Malchi(唜致). Kim Hong-won, a Buan Kim family, was swept by plot treason case due to the information of concubine, in his age 59. He had survived the period of intensified political strives such as 1592 Japanese Invasion of Korea, the Manchu war of 1636 and King Injo's coup, but was exiled for 4 years and 3 months by his concubine. This paper, being based on the life of Kim examined by earlier studies, concentrated upon the matters concerning to Malchi that were not mentioned or mentioned insufficiently in earlier studies. It was found the interrogation progress of Malchi case was focused on the revealing of further crimes of the concerned of Song Gwang-yu case. After judgment, Kim Gyeong-hyeon, who actually took the lead of Malchi's information, was awarded for the information. However, Malchi's information finally proved to be false accusation. King Injo and Court officials were tensely divided in their opinions on the final judgment of Malchi's information case. Kim Hong-won wrote a defending argument at exile place. His son Kim Myeong-yeol pleaded his father by appealing to King and his son-in-law also pleaded in writing. The writings of the family described the case in different views or attenuated certain parts intentionally. It can be said they tried to cut down the facts and meaning of Malchi case on purpose by literature works.