임시의정원과 제헌국회의 관계 ― 역사적 연속성에 관한 세 관점에서 ―

In this paper, I tried to show how complex was the judgment on the historical continuity, focusing on the relation between the Provisional Assembly and the Constituent National Assembly of the Republic of Korea. I pointed out that three different viewpoints of the concept ‘historical continuity’ were involved in the issue, and it could be answered only by a matter of degree. Nevertheless, I began from the premise that, if those differences were once recognized, it would be a blessing rather than a disaster, in that they could contribute to the rich understanding of history. My conclusion was as follows: Firstly, from the viewpoint of the continuity in the source of legitimacy, it was hard to admit the historical continuity between the Provisional Assembly and the Constituent National Assembly of the Republic of Korea. Secondly, from the viewpoint of the continuity in the meaning of developmental history, the considerable, though not the determinate, influential relation of the two Assemblies was inferred. Thirdly, from the viewpoint of the continuity retrospectively created by rules, the problem of the continuity between the two Assemblies was reducted to the democratic justification of the phrase ‘legitimacy succession’ in the Korea Constitution and its interpretation. I thought that the recognition of the three above mentioned viewpoints of concepts of historical continuity could lead the over heated disputes orderly, and make clear issues regarding the problem.