Is it difficult to search for improvement for one year from the “recruitment” decision?

One year from the “recruitment” ruling Is it difficult to search for improvements? October 30th 5:49

k10012156141_201910300543_201910300551.mp4

30 days have passed since the Korean Supreme Court issued a ruling that ordered Japanese companies to compensate for the issue of “recruitment” during the Pacific War. President Moon Jae-in is looking to improve relations between Japan and Korea through dialogue, such as sending a letter to Prime Minister Abe. The focus will be on whether or not it can be filled.

The South Korean Supreme Court, on October 30 last year, made a 100 million won per person in Japanese yen in a trial appealed by four Koreans, “I was forced to work in Japan as a recruiter during the Pacific War” I ordered Nippon Steel and former Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal to compensate more than 9 million yen.

In this regard, the Japanese government has sought to rectify the violation of international law, assuming that the issue of “recruitment” has been resolved in the 1965 Japan-Korea Claims Rights Agreement. Japan's relationship with Korea has been steadily deteriorating, demonstrating that the judgment must be respected based on the principles of Japan.

Under these circumstances, in South Korea, the opinion that the relationship between media and experts should be improved recently, Prime Minister Lee Na Kyung (Li Yi) visited Japan this month. The Korean government is also seeking to improve relations between the two countries through dialogue, such as giving it to Prime Minister Abe.

In the future, we will focus on whether or not we can bridge the gap between the two positions with the issue of “recruitment” that triggered the deterioration of the relationship.

However, in addition to the idea that the Korean government is not in violation of international law, the plaintiff is proceeding with the procedure of cashing the assets of Japanese companies in South Korea, and it remains unclear whether the situation can be overcome. .

What is the problem of “collection”?

In 1944, when the Pacific War came to an end, the Japanese government had a labor shortage in the munitions industry due to the prolonged war. Applied and recruited local people.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs says that the number of people recruited cannot be accurately grasped because there is no detailed information at that time.

On the other hand, the Korean government believes that people who went to Japan before the National Recruitment Order was applied to the Korean Peninsula in 1944 were also “applied”, with at least about 150,000 people.

After the war, with the normalization of diplomatic relations in 1965, Japan concluded a Japan-Korea claim / economic cooperation agreement with the Korean government, and paid $ 500 million for both paid and unpaid economic cooperation. Was said to be “completely and finally resolved”.

The Korean government also revealed in a diplomatic document published in 2005 that the two countries have agreed that the Korean government is responsible for compensation for individuals.

For this reason, the Korean government, like the Japanese government, took the position that the problem of “recruitment” was solved with the normalization of diplomatic relations, and compensated in the 1970s. We paid consolation and medical expenses to those who were deemed “collected” and their bereaved.

However, in October last year, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that it is possible to claim damages for individuals involved in Japan's illegal colonial rule. After this ruling, Japan-Korea relations have been getting worse. It is.

Transition of problems related to “recruitment”

The South Korean Supreme Court issued a ruling that ordered compensation from Nippon Steel and former NS I handed down two orders to order.

In this regard, the Japanese government has stated that the issue of “recruitment” has been solved in the 1965 Japan-Korea Claims Agreement, and that the ruling has fundamentally overturned the legal foundation of Japan-Korea relations. Are often asked to rectify violations of international law.

The Japanese government requested that a meeting based on the Japan-Korea Claims Agreement be held in January and an arbitration committee including third countries be held in May.

However, the Korean side said that “judicial decisions must be respected based on the principle of separation of powers,” and did not respond to the arbitration committee that Japan demanded.

NIPPON STEEL and MHI have not responded to compensation as “very regrettable”, while the plaintiffs seized the shares of a joint venture owned by Nippon Steel etc. Trademarks and patents have been seized, including two logos with the initial "MHI".

And in May, the plaintiffs started the procedure to the court to sell assets such as Nippon Steel that had already been seized, and they are expected to complete the procedure as early as this year.

Once the procedure for cashing is completed, there will be substantial damage to Japanese companies.