중요무형문화재 전승지원금제도의 개선을 위한 법정책적 소고

Transmission subsidy given for the protection and development of important intangible cultural properties should be used for initiating instruction of the item. However, Article 41 of the current Cultural Heritage Protection Act and Article 26 of its implementing ordinances provide that the state or local governments should secure budget to pay expenses required for initiating instruction and do not present the terms or concrete uses of transmission subsidy. But Article 15 No. 290 of the instructions of Cultural Heritage Administration states the intended use needed for initiating instruction. Such transmission subsidy was given as living protection money for holders with important intangible cultural properties at the early stage of payment. However, the current transmission subsidy should be regarded as the government subsidy given for the project with the particular purpose, initiating instruction not just living subsidy. Since it is the monetary benefit supported by the government for a particular project, the ‘effectiveness’ problem for achieving the support purpose is raised inevitably. In case of holding organizations, Cultural Heritage Administration manages and supervises corporations and therefore, the audit for suitability of transmission subsidy use and corporation operation is carried out afterhand. However, separate total inspection is carried out for individual holders but is not systematic as in the case of corporations and seems to be made formally. This seems to be due to the compassionate relationship between the total inspector and holder and the nature of living protection according to aging of holders etc. Recognizing the above problems, we reviewed ways to allow transmission subsidy to be used for initiating instruction use and consider livelihood and welfare problems of holders etc. Thus, we proposed to prescribe the legal basis of transmission subsidy in laws and further distinguish vulnerable transmission items from active transmission items. We propose the dual plan that transmission subsidy is given to vulnerable transmission items as now and initiating instruction is carried out as public education through research and education institutions as in the case of France. By raising education levels and concentration in the relevant education period through it, practical initiating instruction as well as transparent subsidy execution can be made. The ways to expand transmission subsidy for the purpose of initiating instruction expenses given to holders etc. and transmission subsidy for initiating instruction assistants, initiating scholarship students, initiators, completers and additional support are needed. For active transmission items, administrative support should be strengthened for double designation of holders and external activities such as performances and exhibitions etc. Also, we propose insurance for those who work for transmission of the relevant item such as holders, initiating instruction assistants, initiating scholarship students, initiators, completers etc. at the welfare level of transmitters. The revision of related laws should be premised such as Cultural Heritage Protection Act etc. because these improvements can be achieved through purpose regulation establishment of initiating instruction expenses and improvement of initiating instruction system.