S Korean PM to attend emperor's enthronement ceremony

rlaalswls: The 1965 treaty between Japan and Korea states that disputes should be settled through arbitration. Japan has asked for this, but Korea has refused. In doing so Korea has violated the treaty.

Welcome to Japan Mr. PM,

You will be given a warm welcome by the Japanese people. Something that is never given to Japanese diplomats in South Korea.

A solution to the problem must be prepared by South Korea.

If the Blue House supports the Supreme Court's decision, it can only be resolved in the International Court of Justice.

Statement by Foreign Minister Taro Kono, July 19, 2019.

https://www.mofa.go.jp/press/release/press4e_002553.html

If the Blue House cares about South Korea's national sentiment, moreover, solutions based on international law like Germany and Italy will be necessary.

https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/143

Funny that there’s a law in South Korea forbidding the Emperor from setting foot on the Peninsula and yet South Korean government scheduled a trip to attend said Emperor’s Enthronement.

Lee is expected to take part in a banquet hosted by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Thursday, and hold separate talks with him, which would mark the highest-level dialogue since tension flared up last year over the issue of Japan's wartime use of South Korean forced labor, officials said.

It looks like he is not attending only for the buffet and the Sake but to beg for a place on the whitelist.

Right direction, as simple as that.

Bt diplomatic ties r made through treaties n whenever there is more the one country involved it's international matter n japanese companies operating in south Korea is not Korean company so it's a international company so any problem should b solved through icj

Good for Japan. It shows that the Abe Government, by inviting the South Korea leader, is the side above all the pettiness and childishness in the dispute.

At least they are sending someone that has an important position and not some lowly public office.

Please note. South Korea's prime minister will be in Japan on courtesy call, not to sell his country out.

The Supreme Court answers:     A personal claim

1) This trial is not a national lawsuit against Korea against Japan.

It is a lawsuit against a Japanese national who is doing business in Korea by an individual in Korea.

(2) The issue of private billing states that the contents of the Japan-Japan Treaty refer to the San Francisco Agreement.

The original San Francisco treaty clearly states that Germany is a war criminal and reparates all damages of state and individual for apology. There is no document on criminal activity anywhere in the Korea-Japan treaty document, only the fund for the state and the people, and no specific compensation is mentioned. Therefore, even though the rights between nations are extinguished, the right of individual claim to crime is regarded as alive. So the Supreme Court admitted that if the mistake was made in the method of marking the Korea-Japan agreement and corrected the contents again, it could be legally invalidated.

Scrote  

rlaalswls: The 1965 treaty between Japan and Korea states that disputes should be settled through arbitration. Japan has asked for this, but Korea has refused. In doing so Korea has violated the treaty.

I don't know why I don't understand

The trial itself is not a matter of state. If a person in another country commits a crime in Japan and is caught, does he not sin? Do you not judge in Japan under Japanese law?

 This is a Korean trial.

 So why go to the International Court of Justice as a domestic case?

If it thinks it harasses a Japanese company by abusing the law in the Korean court, Japan can sue the International Court of Justice. So the lawsuit in the Court of Justice is that Japan should.

Abe also knows that the subject of a lawsuit to the International Court must be Japan.

A solution to the problem must be prepared by South Korea.

If the Blue House supports the Supreme Court's decision, it can only be resolved in the International Court of Justice.

If the Blue House cares about South Korea's national sentiment, moreover, solutions based on international law like Germany and Italy will be necessary.

This is a matter of law. So Japan is in a dilemma.

Korea's Supreme Court ruling was Korea's personal claim. It's a Korean trial in Korea. The lawsuit was filed against a Japanese company, but it was true that Japanese companies had to follow the Korean law because they were still doing business in Korea.

It is the Japan's responsibility to take it to the International Court.

But Abe won't.

Abe protested to the Korean Supreme Court, discussed the law and fell into a dilemma to admit.

It would have found that Japan's arguments were legally contradictory.

But he didn't want to follow the law, so he pulled out a card called export restrictions.