북조선의 인권침해와 부패를 통해 살펴본 ‘평화통일’ 개헌론: 수복과 영구분단의 두 가지 관점을 중심으로

There are many opinions on the unification of North Joseon and the Republic of Korea. The current Constitution stipulates that "a peaceful unification policy based on a basic liberal democratic order should be established and promoted." Based on this, the mainstream of our academic community has been planning that unification is a must-do without an option, and the method only exists in a peaceful way. However, peaceful unification may be another term for voluntary disarmament, and may be uncritical acceptance by the concept of a fictional association, a nation. This study discusses ways to prevent human rights violations and corruption in North Joseon, revealing that the problem is the paired concept of the Republic of Korea/North Joseon or the Republic of Korea/North Joseon. It is an argument that unification is not a justification, but peace should be a justification. Unlike the Republic of Korea, North Joseon is a descendant and descendant of pre-modern Joseon, where modern values such as the rule of law and separation of powers do not work. The human rights problem in North Joseon is very serious, as evidenced by a number of testimonies and records. North Joseon, which cannot escape the pre-modern monarchy, is reasonable to analyze it as a systematic corruption of the pre-dictatorship state, not a discussion of corruption in a normal country that respects human rights. The researcher reveals that peace, not unification, should be the legitimate purpose and suggests leaving unification as an option. Unification with abnormal countries is not a bargain that gives us our core values, but in the form of "repair" that transplants Korea's core values to North Joseon, or both ways of "permanent division" that abandons the concept of an abstract associated people and erases unification from options. In particular, in the former case, Axelrod's TFT game theory is used to seek ways to punish human rights violations and corruption in North Joseon. If unification is not the purpose, but peace, unification remains an option. Leaving future generations as an option to choose whether to unify or not is the minimum consideration that our older generation can give to future generations.