반민특위조사기록에 나타난 정상참작 사유 연구

A Study on Extenuating Circumstances Found in the Investigation Records of Special Investigation Committee of Anti-National Activitiesvities

반민특위 피의자들은 형을 경감 또는 면제받기 위해 자술서와 진정서 제출, 피고에게 유리한 증인 채택 등을 통해 정상참작을 요청하였다. 피의자에게 유리할 것을 기대하며 진정한 것이었기에, 그 내용은 당연하게도 일반적으로 긍정적으로 평가되는 것이었다. 반민특위의 조사, 기소, 재판 과정에 다양한 정상참작 사유가 반영되었다. 내용별로 분류하면, 부득이하게 협력할 수밖에 없었다는 것, 민족을 위해 한 일이라는 것, 교육·사회사업·산업개발에 공헌했다는 것, 해방 이후 공적을 쌓았다는 것 등이다. 피의자 중 관공리 출신들은 직무수행 과정에서도 정상참작이 가능한 부분이 있었다고 주장하였다. 이들은 조선총독부 정책에 따르기는 하였지만 이는 어쩔 수 없이 부득이하게 할 수밖에 없었고 악질적이지도 않았다는 논리를 폈다. 나아가 적극적으로 수행하지 않음으로써 소극적으로나마 저항하였다는 논리도 있었다. 중추원 참의나 임명직 지방의회 의원을 역임한 사람들은 자의가 아니라 부득이하게 임명되었다고 변명하였고, 선출직 지방의회 의원으로 활동한 사람들은 선거로 당선되었다는 점에서 긍정적 평가를 받기도 하였다. 이들 역시 교육활동이나 지역개발 등에서의 공헌을 내세우며 정상참작을 탄원하였고, 지역운동에의 참여를 내세우기도 하였다. 이는 특별검찰부에 의해 상당 부분 받아들여졌다.

Special investigation committee of anti-national activities was launched on October 23, 1948 and was active for 343 days until August 31, 1949. We analyzed the extenuating circumstances seen during the special committee’s investigation. The main data is “the investigation records of Special investigation committee of anti-national activitiesvities” and it was examined with a focus on “Nonprosecution Case Records”, “Memoirs”, “Petitions” and “Witness Interrogation Reports”, which reveal extenuating circumstances. Various extenuating circumstances were reflected in the investigation, prosecution, and trial process of the special committee. In order to have their sentences reduced or exempted, the suspects requested that the circumstances be taken into consideration by submitting confessions and petitions and selecting witnesses favorable to the defendants. Since it was a complaint or statement made with the expectation that it would be advantageous to the suspect, the content was naturally perceived generally positively. If we classify the extenuating circumstances that appear in the special committee investigation records by content, they include that there was no choice but to cooperate; that it was not a pro-Japanese act as it was done for the sake of the nation; that it contributed to education, social work, and industrial development; and that it was a public achievement after liberation. It can be classified as having accumulated. Among the suspects, those from government offices claimed that there were extenuating circumstances in the process of performing their duties. Although they followed the policy of the Joseon Government-General, they had no choice but to do so and argued that they were not malicious in the process. Furthermore, there was also the logic that they passively resisted it by not actively carrying out it. It was also claimed that there were activities for the nation in the performance of duties. Those who served as elected local council members received positive evaluations in that they were elected. They also petitioned for extenuating circumstances, citing their contributions to educational activities and regional development. They also advocated participation in local movements such as the movement to publicize the electricity business. These matters were largely accepted by the prosecution department, and this can be confirmed in the reasons for suspension of prosecution in the nonprosecution case record.