개성상인 복식부기 장부 본지점 회계

This paper is the first attempt to analyze the branch accounting of a Korean traditional double-entry bookkeeping document. The subject of investigation is the head office account named ‘Kim Hong-youl’ included in ‘The Registered Cultural Heritage No. 587’. The period analyzed spans from 1898 to 1903, In this paper, it will be verified that ‘Kim Hong-youl’ is not a Dojung account which accounts partnership but the head office account of branch management. Journal entries of individual transactions, posting process, and settlement of accounts are analyzed in detail. This study is expected to enhance our understanding of branch accounting and management practice of a Korean Gaeseong merchant in the turn of the 20th century. It was found that the branch transactions were recorded based on double-entry bookkeeping principle with a head office concentration system. The debit of the Kim Hong-youl account can be understood as an investment in branch and the credit as the recovery of the investment. The crdit balance of the account at the year end is the annual net income of the branch. Annual net income was distributed to the head office and branch manager Kim Hong-youl by half. The fact that net income was halved is an evidence that Kim Hong-youl, the branch manager, was a ‘Chain’ who is a well-trained employee in charge of the part of business without monthly compensation. In the year of loss, it was carried forward to the following year. This paper provides additional evidence that the capitalistic thinking and management practice of Gaeseong merchant identified in previous studies were consistently applied to this branch accounting. First, the incentive compensation plan, which divides profits in half with branch manager in stead of paying monthly salary, has been implemented since 1898. In agricultural management of rice field, a yearly compensation contract was signed with workers based on expected crop and wages paid reflected actual crop. Compensation plans with motivational incentive scheme are common in current management practice since the scientific management had been introduced into the management area at the beginning of the 20th century. It is an evidence that Korea had an incentive scheme similar to USA around the same time. Second, the branch was one of the decentralized management organization and the performance index evaluated was net income. This means that the branch was managed as a profit center although is not clear how much independence the branch maintained in operation. However, compared to the fact that DuPont and GM implemented the responsibility accounting system at the beginning of the 20th century, Gaeseong merchant was also conducting the same practice around the same time. Third, the accounting record investigated explicitly deducted the cost of capital as an expense in the year end settlement of accounts and added it to the capital. In the ginseng field business, income was computed by considering capital cost for both investment and recovery. Since the branch accounting was settled in the same way as ginseng field, it is clear that the Gaeseong merchant consistently accounted for capital cost. Net income after the cost of equity capital is eqivalent to the recognition of the opportunity cost of equity capital in accounting. If we look at the cost of equity capital as the market average return, net income of the branch is the abnormal income stipulated in today’s capital market-based accounting. Since the accounting income of the branch incorporated opportunity cost, it can be seen that the same criteria for both investment decision-making and performance evaluation was applied by the Gaeseong merchant Park Young-jin family. ‘The Registered Cultural Heritage No. 587’ is the only accounting book known in the world that explicitly calculated net income after consideration of opportunity cost. Fourth, the fact that net income was divided in half between head office and branch manager is an additional evidence that Park Young-jin family, Gaeseong merchant, consistently practiced win-win management with the ‘Chain’ of the branch manager. This income distribution practice is unimaginable in capital-oriented management today. As identified in previous studies, an interest rate of 15% was consistently applied to financing between Gaeseong merchants. This suggests that financing among Gaeseong merchants was not a profit seeking business but a mean to realize win-win sprit among them. In light of the reality that the market interest rate exceeded 3% per month at the time, the 1.25% per month interest level itself is a specific example of win-win management. The net income of paternerships of ginseng field was also distributed by 1/n to participants of partnership such as investors, ginseng cultivation specialists, and managers. This implies that the value of capital, technology of growing ginseng, and management knowhow were recognized equally. Such income distribution is an example of consistently practiced win-win management which is an important topic to be realized in the modern capitalism economy.