Compared to Early Chosun Dynasty, the spatial structure of most local Eupseongs of Korea had a standardized change with the expansion and spread of the Rye-hak(禮學:a study of confucius Rite). Meanwhile in the process of rebuilding Eupseongs there was a tendency of relocation of the local government offices(官衙) and its attached facilities in terms of functions and use. Although it was PyeongSanseong Miryang Eupseong had an unreasonable spatial structure locating Gaeksa(客舍; accommodation house for visitors) in the middle of the local government office complex, and Dongheon(東軒;main office building) in the east of it before the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592. However with the reorganization of spatial Structure of local Eupseongs after the Japanese invasion Gaeksa was moved to the foot of Adongsan where commanded a fine view of river. Dongheon was moved to the center of Eupseong for the effective management of its auxiliary organizations. It was because road system and administrative efficiency had a serious effect on deciding the location of the local government office and its attached facilities. After the Japanese invasion Hyangchoeng(鄕廳), having been out of Eupseong, also was moved to the independent location within Eupseong separate from Dongheon and Gaeksa. It seemed to take into account the autonomy of Hyangchoeng. Dongheon, Gaeksa, and Hyangchoeng which are the crucial facilities of Milyang Eupseong were arranged at each angular point of big triangle. In order to enhance the administative efficiency, the attached administrative facilities were arranged surrounding Dongheon and Hyangchoeng. The spatial structure of Milyang Eupseong in the late Choseon dynasty was of great difference from that of uniformly organized system of early Choseon Period. It was because the development of administrative function, the pursuit of efficiency, and commercial progress had a great impact on the change of urban space.

Periodically, the Japanese Castle was created in the domestic of Japan and then 2 invasions into Chosun was started. The Japanese Castle in the domestic of Japan was repaired several times by the building boom of castle before & after 2 invasions and so the initially-built type of castles was changed. Accordingly, there are much difficulties to understand the original shape of Japanese Castle. Through the Japanese Castle within Korea called as the fossil of Japanese Castle, I would like to examine & consider its building period and characteristics. The terminology called as [Two Side Stone's Wall] is that of castle which is not acknowledged in the Japanese Academic Circles. However, it means the two-fold wall of Japanese Castle which was widely applied to the fortification way in the Age of Japan Edo. The terminology of [Sori] says the stonework curve in the corner of Japanese Castle which is indicated best in the Japanese Castle. It calls the curve as like the fan frame. [Curb Stone's Wall] says the type of castle wall constructed with over 1 face in wall body of Japanese Castle. (1) About classifying the construction period of Japanese Castle, the curb stone's wall and the castle having no two side stone's wall must consider the building period as that of Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592. If there was [Sori], the two-side stone's wall was used and the place which supported the documentary data, in particular, the place having the record of contraction is considered to be confirmed as the castle constructed in the period of Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1597. (2) The two-side-type stone's wall shown in the Modern Japanese Stone Castle is difficultly considered to be generated from the Japanese Castle at the period of Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592 and in 1597. (3) The beautiful [Sori] shown in the Modern Japanese Stone Castle was started from the Japanese Castle of Korea at the period of Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1597. It is difficultly considered which its indication was firstly generated by the Chaesung-Folded Segment Structure.

임진왜란에 대한 인식에는 당파적 성향이 강하다. 전란이 일어나기 9년 전 (1583)에 栗谷 李珥가 10만 양병을 주장한 것, 1590-91년 通信使 일행의 보고 가 正使, 副使 간에 서로 달랐던 것에 대한 논란이 대표적이다. 두 가지는 이 시 대 역사 인식에 큰 영향을 줄 수 있는 것인데도 객관적 분석, 판단보다도 분쟁 적 측면이 필요이상으로 강조되는 경향이 있다. 당시 사대부들은 心性 도야를 중시하는 性理學者들이었다. 따라서 공과 사를 분명히 가리고, 강한 是非之心 을 가졌다. 조정에 나아와서는 聖聰, 곧 군주의 옳은 판단을 이끄는 데 기여하 는 것을 사명으로 삼아, 정사를 논할 때 자신의 견해를 엄정하게 표현하는 한편, 동료의 진언에 잘못이 보이면 지위 고하를 막론하고 논척하였다. 그러나 상대 의 논변이 설득력이 있거나 실제의 사세에서 자신의 견해가 잘못된 것을 발견 하면 이를 인정하기를 미덕으로 삼았다. 10만 양병설이나 통신사 보고 건에 관 한 오늘날의 대척적 인식은 사실은 당대 관련자들 사이의 인식보다도 더 과장 된 면이 없지 않다. 이 글은 당대의 관련 기록에 근거하여 후대의 부정적 윤색을 걷어내어 바른 지식과 인식을 확보하는 데 기여하고자 한다. 栗谷 李珥의 10 만 양병제안, 鶴峰 金誠一의 의병 招諭의 역할, 西厓 柳成龍의 관군 재건의 공 로를 주요 논제로 한다.