제3세대 인권의 객체로서의 문화유산

Abstract

The first and second generations of human rights which are established on individuality fall short of offering full protection to cultural heritage. Recognition of the solidarity among entities even beyond the geographical and temporal limit is an essential prerequisite of the right to culture as common heritage of mankind. Furthermore, cultural heritage serves as the basis of human identity which leads to human dignity and cultural heritage itself has its own value to be protected regardless of its use. These factors support Karel Vasak’s argument of the ownership of the common cultural heritage of humanity as one of the third generation human rights. However, the third generation human right to cultural heritage not only conflicts with property rights but also entails contradiction between different group interests. With the power of the blockchain technology which enables openness, transparency, anonymity, decentralization and trust, DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) hand out clues to solve the problems of the third generation human right to cultural heritage. The provisions in the Korean civil act regarding an association that is not a juristic person also provide useful legal methods to realize the collective ownership of cultural heritage. If DAOs have the legal status of the association without juristic personality in Korean civil act and the Articles of DAOs clearly stipulate the public nature of the ownership and the solidarity with others including future generations, the third-generation human right to cultural heritage can be enforced effectively. In Korea, the National Treasure DAO tried to be the first DAO with the purpose of public ownership of two Korean national treasures. Though it failed, it gave enough insight to make a future breakthrough. It cannot be emphasized enough that DAOs and its collective ownership alone leave a vast lacuna in guaranteeing the public access and participation in the cultural heritage with a common value. Public law research that carves out the details of solidarity in cultural heritage must fill the blank. It should be incarnated in the Articles of DAOs to keep the common value of cultural heritage intact. Also, the public law research results should guide states, public authorities, museums, and other specialists who will take the initiative of the cultural heritage DAOs in near future.