Our coverage team also got internal documents from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs after President Moon Jae-in took office. The Japanese government is considering the compulsory dismissal as more serious than the comfort women issue.

This article was covered by Park Won-kyung alone.


On August 17, 2017, President Moon Jae - in referred to the issue of compulsory dismissal at a press conference on his inauguration.

[President Moon Jae-in (press conference on his 100th day in office): Korea's Constitutional Court or Supreme Court ruled that the civil rights of individuals who have been forced to leave the company, including Mitsubishi, remain unchanged despite the agreement between the two countries.]

Eight days after the press conference, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has written a document analyzing the impact of the compulsory award.

The paper says the Japanese government has expressed concern about negative effects on the economic relations between Korea and Japan if the ruling on the president 's remarks is confirmed.

In particular, the Japanese government believes that the judgment on the victims of forced evictions is a serious matter that could lead to the collapse of the Korea-Japan relationship, he said.

In the case of Japan's decision to settle the indictment, it was expected that it would be required to arbitrate under the claim agreement, the dispute settlement procedure between the investors and the state, and the international court of justice.

When the decision was made in December of the same year, the countermeasures document states that a meeting organized by the presidential office and the presidential office is necessary for the preparation of countermeasures against the crisis.

However, the government's official position was only the theoretical content that it was desirable to pay the victims the alimony by the voluntary contributions of the two countries in June this year, eight months after the Supreme Court ruling.



Let's talk to Park Jung-kyung, a lawyer who has covered this problem.

Q. What is your position on the existence of a 'personal claim'?

[Park Won Kyung reporter: Yes. Yesterday we gave you the contents of the documents written by the Chief of the Office of the Attorney General in the Chung Wa Dae government. According to the documents, from 1995 onward, it is clear that the governments of the past have survived individual claims of the victims regardless of the agreement. That being said, there is no legal difference in the Supreme Court's ruling that raised the victims' hands.

Q. What is your current situation six years ago?

[Park Won-Kyung reporter: We can expect to see exactly what happened six years ago, such as Japan's restrictions on hydrogen fluoride exports and whitelisting exclusion. The question is whether we have prepared the countermeasures against such a prediction properly. As you have seen, the government seemed to be in urgent trouble avoiding the solution. Let's slow down the problem, so we have to slow down the Supreme Court's decision, and I think it's because of this recognition. "

Q. Is the Moon Jae-in government expected?

[Park Won Kyung reporter: The document was written by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Ministry of Foreign Affairs is a government department that has business continuity regardless of regime change. It is reasonable to assume that the current Ministry of Foreign Affairs has a document written six years ago and that it knows the expectation at that time. Then, after the government started, it will be a matter of whether the countermeasures are properly prepared. If we look at the current situation, I wonder if there was a proper countermeasure.]

(Image coverage: Lee Jae Young, Image editing: Kim Ho Jin)

▶ ▶ ▶ ▶ ▶ ▶ ▶ Instead of countermeasures,