Balhae is Korean history

 The history of Balhae is a controversial issue between our country and our neighboring country. The arguments of Japan, Russia, China, etc. are different from those of Korea, and if you look at them, China says, "Balhae is China's history," and Japan and Russia say, "It's neither Chinese history nor Korean history." However, there is a lot of evidence that Balhae's history is the history of our country. Most of the evidence that supports other countries' theories about Balhae Temple is not logical. Then from now on, I will refute the claims of other countries and write the reason why Balhae's history is Korea. First of all, China now claims Balhae as a national regime with the Malgal as its main focus, a subordinate to the party, or a local government of the party. However, there are many suspicious and nonsensical aspects of these claims. Let's hear the reason. First, the fact that Balhae wrote the era name shows that it was a different country on an equal footing with China. Because only the emperor could write the era name. There are traces of Balhae maintaining the emperor system internally, and in the case of the emperor at the gate of Princess Jeonghye and Princess Jeonghyo's tomb, King Mun was considered emperor. And if you look at the existence of Heo Wangbu in the 4th year of the reign of the Emperor and the Seonjo Castle, one of the three Balhae stars, you can see that in the case of 의, it means the order of the emperor. Secondly, we can see that Balhae is not a local government in China from what the party called Haedongseongguk. If it were a subordinate state of China, it would not have been called Haedongseongguk. You can see that the word "guk" is an independent country. In addition, Balhae has established diplomatic relations with China, but he has never bowed himself in tribute, and even when the envoy went, he verbally conveyed what he had to say... Of course, China also gives some ridiculous reasons why Balhae is China's history, which claims "the city structure of Balhae and the Party is similar." "The governing body of Balhae is similar to that of the Party." Their argument is, "When the city of Tang entered the gate of the capital, a large road called Jujak-daero stretched from the gate to the royal palace." Of course, the capital of Balhae was the same.', Balhae is the history of China, citing examples such as 'the governing body of Balhae is similar to the Party.' I make this argument. However, it is too far-fetched to call a subordinate state just because the governing bodies are similar.  As for the governing body, Joseon is similar to China, so it's a local government of China; it's also seen in Goryeo, Joseon, India, and even Vietnam. Are you saying that the history of Goryeo, Joseon, India, and Vietnam is also included in China's history, according to China's claim? China's argument is so contrived that it is not worth discussing... As for the governing body, Joseon is similar to China, so it's a Chinese local government; and also Japan and Russia are arguing that Balhae doesn't go into both Chinese and Korean history, and I can refute this argument. Even if the territory covers most of what is now Manchuria and Russia, Balhae has a clear history of our country. It is said that there are still people in Korea who are descendants of Daejo-young, such as Yeongsoon-Tae and Hyeopgye-Tae. Not in China. And... First of all, more than 90% of Balhae's ruling class were Goguryeo people, and there were many "Go", Goguryeo royalty, and Daejoyeong, who founded Balhae, was also a descendant of Goguryeo people. Daejo-yeong's title is "Gao Wang," which is thought to be from Goguryeo's aristocracy. Second, the study of Balhae was far ahead of China in Korea, and the Silhak scholar Yu Deuk-gong published Balhae High School in the 18th century and claimed that it was the history of Korea. Even if you look at foreign records, in China's Old Tongseo, Daejo-yeong is also said to be a variant of Goguryeo, and the Japanese librarian Sok Japan also revealed the legitimacy that Balhae connected Buyeo-Goguryo to a national book sent for diplomatic relations. I know that this is in the first grade of high school textbooks, but even though the New Party Office claims that Dae Jo-young is Malgal, the book came long after Balhae's founding, and it is less valuable and has many historical mistakes, so it is unbelievable I learned. Also, after Balhae's fall by the Kitan, all the Confucian people were absorbed into Goryeo. And thirdly, the culture is quite similar to Goguryeo. Most of Balhae's relics resemble Goguryeo's, and the style of living culture is also revealed in Korea's unique culture, Ondol style, and inherited Goguryeo's traditions in Buddhist statues, stone lanterns, and ancient tombs. In addition, Chinese culture, which appears from the early Balhae period, can be seen as being inherited from Goguryeo culture, and it is not unreasonable to say that the five-view system is also based on Goguryeo's five-part system. Let's put everything aside The fact that Daeheummu, the king of Balhae, called himself the king of Goryeo in a letter sent to Japan shows that he was a descendant of Goguryeo. Just as Goguryeo is our history (even if we insist on it, not China), Balhae's history is our history...