national

Nippon Steel appeals S Korean court order over asset sale

18 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

18 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Japan has repeatedly apologized and paid for its war crimes, yet South Korea continues to demand money, blame Japan for something that happened eighty years ago, and indoctrinate its children to hate Japan. This is the country where people set themselves on fire at protests, gas stations refused to refuel Japanese cars, and a district tried to put stickers in classrooms saying “This device was made by a war criminal”. As a child, I grew up with my own parents constantly reminding me of what Japan did eighty years ago as if it happened yesterday.

The indoctrination and self-victimization makes me ashamed to be Korean.

24 ( +37 / -13 )

If this appeal fails, Japan should cease all trade and diplomatic relations with South Korea. Korean student and work visas should be revoked, and all diplomats ordered out. Permanently.

Enough is enough.

25 ( +35 / -10 )

@Fighto!

If this appeal fails

It will fail because the constitutional court already ruled that Japanese companies are held liable for use of forced laborers in damages claim.

Lower courts are merely deciding on the technical details of carrying out the order of the highest court.

-20 ( +11 / -31 )

Ya have to compensate...

-23 ( +10 / -33 )

Michael MachidaToday  07:31 am JST

Ya have to compensate...

Japan did, multiple times, and each time the South Korean government squandered the money. This is nothing more than the South Korean government having a convenient bogey-man to rile up the population when their approval ratings start to drop.

22 ( +33 / -11 )

Moon Jae In's approval ratings must have tanked again, the usual typical cycle, rile up the country over the already settled wartime issues to distract public attention and gain some loot from Japanese companies at the same time.

23 ( +32 / -9 )

Japan did, multiple times, and each time the South Korean government squandered the money. 

Maybe read the following article before going on Abenarratives bandwagon. Shows the biggest lies concocted by Japan.

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:13100:0::NO::P13100_COMMENT_ID:2218404

-19 ( +7 / -26 )

The language in the 1965 treaty is unambiguous. It stated  "The Contracting parties confirm that [the] problem concerning property, rights and interests of the two contracting parties and their nationals … is settled completely and finally".

I guess in Korean "completely and finally" means "until "politically convenient". It is rather sad how much energy and time South Korea spends on anti-Japanese hatred. They would be better served putting their own house in order and worrying about the genuine threats to their north.

20 ( +27 / -7 )

@Attilathehungry

"The Contracting parties confirm that [the] problem concerning property, rights and interests of the two contracting parties and their nationals … is settled completely and finally".

And where is the word "damages"?

It was this absence of damages in the treaty text, and its presence in exchanges memos and draft text, prove Japanese negotiators knew they were exposing Japan to future damages claim, but they could have never imagined the day when Korea would grow powerful and start demanding apologies and damages payment from Japan.

-19 ( +8 / -27 )

And where is the word "damages"?

It was this absence of damages in the treaty text, and its presence in exchanges memos and draft text, prove Japanese negotiators knew they were exposing Japan to future damages claim, but they could have never imagined the day when Korea would grow powerful and start demanding apologies and damages payment from Japan.

Damage of what?

If damage of being mobilized illegally by a foreign nation as your idiotic judges based the verdict on, of course, it is not covered because it was not illegal mobilization. BTW these plaintiffs, none of them were mobilized but they volunteered to go to and work in Japan.

 If damage from war time labor..i.e, injury, death.. It's been covered under the "Claim" and also, exchange memos, draft text, pre-agreement dialogues as Vienna treaty states " all the supplementary documents are to be part of the agreement". Heck, It is South Korea intentionally edited the agreement text so that it could be a bit unclear to hide the fact Japan's willingness to compensate individually and directly to each victims. Do you know why? Yes it is because of the reason everyone already knows.

Either way, South Korean courts are filled with bunch of idiots intentionally ignoring and overstepping Article 3 in the Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Co-operation between Japan and the Republic of Korea, which clearly stipulates how to proceed in case of any disputes on interpretation and implementation of the agreement.

19 ( +26 / -7 )

Maybe read the following article before going on Abenarratives bandwagon. Shows the biggest lies concocted by Japan.

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:13100:0::NO::P13100_COMMENT_ID:2218404

What is it you kept presenting this 20year-old garbage reports from such corrupt organization, which wouldn't even have guts to revise the reports to correct their errors?

 McDougall Report? No academia nowadays believe his special reports which are complete crap

16 ( +24 / -8 )

Samir Basu's point is worth repeating: "It was this absence of damages in the treaty text, and its presence in exchanges memos and draft text, prove Japanese negotiators knew they were exposing Japan to future damages claim, but they could have never imagined the day when Korea would grow powerful and start demanding apologies and damages payment from Japan."

Japan, and especially Japan's less than rational right-wing, should get use to South Korean's growing power and Japan's own declining prestige.

-18 ( +7 / -25 )

They can try, but I don't hold out hope for them. Just yesterday, I read an article that the Supreme Court of Korea is again legalizing robbery, so one can expect that when the case snakes it's way up, it will have the same outcome.

https://topics.smt.docomo.ne.jp/article/asahi/world/ASQ1C5W7JQ1CUHBI019

9 ( +15 / -6 )

@jeancolmarToday 12:40 pm JST

Samir Basu's point is worth repeating

Perhaps you should be more interested as to whether the text that's put in the final version of the treaty actually leaves this hole. As I've discussed previously, here's what they put in the final text:

1 The High Contracting Parties confirm that the problems concerning property, rights, and interests of the two High Contracting Parties and their peoples (including juridical persons) and the claims between the High Contracting Parties and between their peoples, including those stipulated in Article IV(a) of the Peace Treaty with Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on September 8, 1951, have been settled completely and finally.

The fast version is that "claims" does include torts. It's literally in the structure of both Japanese and Korean law, which are offshoots of German law. Damages are compensation for torts.

The Korean court is just ignoring the established categories to create new categories and then insisting the old rules don't count. For this reason, even if hypothetically damages is explicitly written into the text, the Korean court will just invent a new category. "Criminal" damages are not "damages" as meant in the treaty. "Damages for 'Inhumane' Actions" are not "damages", and so on. The principal problem is the Korean court ignoring the clear meaning of the text in its unilateral interpretation.

16 ( +22 / -6 )

Kazuaki Shimazaki: Argument off the point. The argument above argues, that "this absence of damages in the treaty text" (Samir Batsu) leaves So. Koreans to still sue for damages. Note that case here is predicated on what is missing from the treaty.

This aside, the 1965 treaty was railroaded on the South Korean by former Japanese colonial puppet Dictator Park by the U.S. with the support of Japan. There were violent demonstrations in South Korea against this treaty and demonstrations in Japan as well.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

@jeancolmarToday  03:03 pm JST

Kazuaki Shimazaki: Argument off the point. The argument above argues, that "this absence of damages in the treaty text" (Samir Batsu) leaves So. Koreans to still sue for damages. Note that case here is predicated on what is missing from the treaty.

It is you who are way off.  Read to learn Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

> This aside, the 1965 treaty was railroaded on the South Korean by former Japanese colonial puppet Dictator Park by the U.S. with the support of Japan. There were violent demonstrations in South Korea against this treaty and demonstrations in Japan as well.

So? Park was democratically erected 2 years before 1965 treaty. Or perhaps you are negating any treaties with non-democratic countries.

Regardless, what South Korean justice should have done in such case, despite whatever way-off excuse like what you are making here, is to negate 1965 treaty and the agreement and tell the world it is because of the former Japanese colonial puppet who led to concluding ... blah, blah, blah.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Either intentionally or ignorantly, whichever, these people are the very cancer

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Seems the Japanese here are having a hard time understanding the document.

the plain language of the treaties indicates that they were not intended to foreclose claims for compensation by individuals for harms committed by the Japanese military in violation of human rights or humanitarian law

Fact. Previous Japanese prime ministers even mentioned that an individual's right to claim was not extinguished by the 1965 treaty.

Fact. 100 Japan's lawyers all agreed with the decisions made by the Supreme Court of Korea with respect to rulings for the slave labourers.

Fact. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states

States that stand accused of having violated such fundamental laws must not be allowed to rely on mere technicalities to avoid liability.

In other words, sexual slavery, slave labour, inhumane acts are violation of human rights that no treaty can extinguish.

Deal with your government and lawyers first before crying foul over South Korea.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites