Korea's continued Jewish cosplay.All Japan - South Korea relations come to this.
2022-01-24
Category:Japanese comfort woman problem
Photo by Air and Space Museum (licensed under CC BY 2.0 )
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
The origin of the problem is Jewish cosplay
Japanese Military Sexual Slavery The problem and recruitment problem are individualized, but what Korea has been talking about since the end of World War II is JewishCosplay .The Asahi flag issue is also related.South Korea tells Japan to imitate Germany because Germany compensates for the war and Japan does not.Japan invaded countries that were considered Western colonies and paid reparations to those countries.China has waived compensation.Korea was not an enemy country and there was no war damage , so the concept of compensation itself does not exist.
Reality as stated in the preamble to the Constitution
When it comes to Jewish cosplay, we are in the same situation as Jews.Why are Jews rescued and we have no help?Germany says it is compensating, but Germany only compensates each country comprehensive except for compensation for Jews.The logic of reparation can be seen from these things as if it had been done to Jews.The oath of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea clearly says, "#ylow #Japan's inhumane assault #/ylow #" and the current preamble of the Korean Constitution says it will inherit the provisional government's legal code.So far, Nazi = Japanese equation.Therefore, it becomes the Harkencroits = Asahi flag.
Why are the people who were slaughtered and the people who developed the same?
What is certain to be known as a historical fact is that the Holocaust is an operation to slaughter and annihilate Jews in the vast area of Europe.Japan claims to have carried out genocide on the Korean Peninsula, but the population growth is remarkable.The U.S. says there was no Japan's war crimes under GHQ rule .MacArthur's postwar policy is to promptly convene an international military court to punish war criminals, justify the American war, and quickly bring Japan back to the international community.America was looking for war criminals.It is concluded that it was not on the Korean Peninsula.
To be clear, Japan and the Nazis, Koreans and Jews are completely different.World War II also has a completely different history.No country in the world thinks Koreans and Jews are the same.It is clear that the provisional government wants to replace Korea with Jews and pretend to be a war victim and become a victorious group.
POINT South Korea has requested attendance at the San Francisco Peace Conference and has been rejected by the United States.At this time, I was trying to get the international community to recognize Jukdo sovereignty.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Are comfort women women's volunteer corps? If you read the ``Women's Volunteer Labor Ordinance,'' you will see that it is a clear lie.
Below is an excerpt from the Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order. Only those certified by the National Vocational Ability Declaration Ordinance could join the volunteer corps (Article 3).
Excerpts from the National Vocational Ability Declaration Order, which is the basis for Article 3, are also posted thereafter.
It was a proud profession in which only the most talented women could join the volunteer corps. In South Korea, it is believed that women who were sleeping at train stations were taken away and forced to become comfort women. Apparently they think volunteer corps and comfort women are the same thing. The women's volunteer corps is not such a funny story, but it is a group of female workers who were brought together by imperial edict.
The detailed application details and the local commissioner will check your skills. When people confuse comfort women with the volunteer corps, they have no idea what the volunteer corps is. Incidentally, the Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order has not been issued on the Korean Peninsula.
[Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order] Imperial Ordinance No. 519 of 1944
Article 3 Persons who are to engage in volunteer work (hereinafter referred to as volunteers) are women who are registered citizens according to the National Vocational Ability Declaration Ordinance.
Girls other than those falling under the preceding paragraph will only be allowed to serve as members if they volunteer.
Article 4: The period of continued volunteer labor shall be approximately one year, unless there are special circumstances.
If you wish to continue working as a volunteer for more than one year, you must obtain the consent of the volunteer.
Article 5 A person who wishes to receive volunteer labor shall request or apply to the local commissioner as prescribed by the order.
Article 6 Local Commissioner If there is a request or application pursuant to the provisions of the preceding article and it is deemed necessary to dispatch the women's volunteer corps, the municipal mayor (municipal mayor) Heads of other organizations or school principals, including those equivalent to the head of the ward (in the areas where the wards of Tokyo exist, as well as Kyoto City, Osaka City, Nagoya City, Yokohama City, and Kanda City, the ward head, and the same shall apply hereinafter); We will order the members to select those who will serve as members.
Article 7: Persons who receive the orders set forth in the preceding article should select those who should become members of the group, taking into account the person's age, physical condition, family situation, etc., and report this to the local chief.
Article 8: The local commissioner shall select members from among those who have submitted a report pursuant to the provisions of the preceding article, notify the person accordingly in a volunteer labor order, and give instructions on necessary matters regarding volunteer labor. I agree.
[National Vocational Ability Declaration Order] Royal Ordinance No. 5 of 1949
Article 2 The following persons shall be required to report (hereinafter referred to as persons required to report):
A person who has been continuously engaged in an occupation designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare for three months or more in the current place of residence.
A person who has been continuously engaged in the occupation listed in the previous item for more than one year, and who has retired for less than five years.
Those who have graduated from a university, vocational school, vocational school, or any other equivalent school designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare by completing a course designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
A person who has completed the prescribed course at a technician training facility designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
A person who has passed a certification or examination designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare or a person who has obtained a license designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
Other persons designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
Article 4 When a citizen becomes a person who is required to file a return, or when a person who is required to file under Article 11 and has not yet filed a return no longer falls under the provisions of the same article, the person who is required to file a return shall report the following matters within 14 days to the employment agency in the place of employment if the person requiring the report is employed, and to the employment agency in the place of residence for other persons. After filing the declaration, if the person requiring the declaration moves to another area, the declaration shall be made in the same manner.
One name
Date of birth
Three domicile
Place of residence
Military service related
Academic background
Employed person is his/her occupation name
Place of employment (for those who have two or more places of employment, this is the main place of employment)
If a person is engaged in or has engaged in the occupation set forth in Article 2, paragraph 1, his or her employment history and skill level
For those who fall under Article 2, Item 4, information regarding the course they have completed.
For those who fall under Article 2, item 5, matters related to the examination, certification, or license that they have taken.
Those receiving salary or wages, the amount
Other matters specified by the order.
Article 8: The local commissioner (governor) or director of an employment agency may test the skills and other vocational abilities of the applicant.
Legality of Japanese Annexation of Korea The Supreme Court's decision on recruitment is based on the unilateral recognition of torts under Japanese rule. There are two main points in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Korea. One is the issue of the Japan-Korea Claims Agreement. The second is the recognition of torts under Japanese rule, which was the premise of the decision.
The waiver of claims in post-war processing was under the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights related to claims. Countries that do not ratify the peace treaty will individually conclude a treaty. Diplomatic protection means that the country does not diplomatically protect the exercise of claims against other countries. A-bomb survivors in Hiroshima have attempted to claim damages against the United States for indiscriminate attacks on civilians as a tort. At this time, the view of the Government of Japan is that the Government of Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights and the government is not involved. However, he replied that the individual's claim was not extinguished. "Yanagi answer". It is the answer of the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs and the administrative view.
In fact, South Korea has been activating the movement for individual claims by quoting this Yanai answer. Until then, South Korea, on the contrary, interpreted that the individual's claim itself had disappeared (described in the Korean side manual of the 1965 Agreement), and after hearing this Yanai's answer, he knew for the first time that the individual's claim would not be extinguished. It was. Aside from the administrative view of Japan, the legal view was that in 2007 the Supreme Court of Japan stated that it was not subject to protection, including individual jurisdiction. At the same time, the individual's claim right will not be extinguished.
In other words, the problem is that a treaty is a promise between countries, not a contract between individual citizens. Individuals do not lose their claims as individual rights, but the state does not act for them. The Supreme Court of Korea interpreted that the jurisdiction would not be extinguished. The first point is whether or not jurisdiction is included.
Regarding the second tort recognition, when Japan signed the 1965 Agreement, Japan is approaching the conclusion with a consistent view that the annexation of Korea is not an illegal act under international law. The eight articles presented by the South Korean side in the agreement are about claims for the property of natural persons (individuals), but it is written and agreed in the agreement to abandon them. And it is not the concept of compensation, but economic cooperation.
The Japanese annexation of Korea is not illegal because there is no fact that Japan occupied it by force and forcibly concluded it, and it was signed and stamped when the two countries signed the agreement. The letter of the emperor Sunjong's name is written on the power of attorney to delegate full authority to Prime Minister Ye Wanyong, and there is no debate about whether this is a signature, and Sunjong itself is not recognized as an emperor. There is a claim that there is no signature of Gojong, but the universal public law of international law at that time stipulates that the signature of the head of state is not always necessary for concluding a treaty.
The reason why tort recognition is the point is that the Korean side ignored the views and interpretations under international law and unilaterally recognized it as tort. Korean civil law stipulates that personal property rights and claims will be extinguished if not exercised for 20 years. In other words, normally, both the recruiter and the comfort woman have passed the extinction prescription of the claim. Looking at the cases of claims related to the claim right at the time of the annexation of Japan and South Korea in South Korea, there are a number of judgments that were dismissed because of the extinction prescription. What happens if the Japanese annexation of Korea becomes an illegal act? The claim right at point 1 does not expire. Since it is a principle of international law that the right to claim under tort has no statute of limitations, the Daiho-in Temple has unfoundedly recognized the annexation of Korea as a tort.
As mentioned above, an individual's claim will not be extinguished only on the premise of tort. The treaty exists as another matter, it is a promise between countries, and the Korean government has a strict obligation to keep the treaty.
What is the main purpose of the comfort women agreement? The purpose is for the Korean side to establish a foundation for reconciliation and resolution - South Korea does not understand the main purpo
I don't understand anything about this article (below).Apparently, the former Japanese Military comfort woman refused to receive 1 billion yen donated by Japan in the 2015 Japanese Military comfort woman agreement, so the Korean government donated 1 billion yen to establish a gender equality fund.
In the first place, the Moon Jae In administration and Korean public opinion have been excluded, but the Japanese government has not donated 1 billion yen directly to the former Japanese Military comfort woman.The South Korean government has set up a foundation to support the former Japanese Military comfort woman and provided funds for the foundation.The Korean government's activities and foundation will settle the dispute with the former Japanese Military comfort woman.Since it was a public interest foundation, it would be good to raise new public works projects and funds through the foundation's activities and increase the amount of funds to solve the problem.Japan and South Korea agreed on the Japanese Military comfort woman agreement.The fact that the former Japanese Military comfort woman refused to accept the 1 billion yen donated by Japan itself is contrary to the intent of the Japanese Military comfort woman agreement.
Moon Jae In has dissolved the Reconciliation and Healing Foundation, and one billion yen has not been repaid to Japan, and it has reportedly invested one billion yen in establishing a new Gender Equality Fund.In any case, it is clear that the South Korean government will take the initiative in solving the problem.
[2015 Japanese Military comfort woman Agreement]
Japan side:
(2) Based on this experience, the Japanese government has taken measures to heal the wounds of all former Japanese Military comfort womans based on the Japanese government's budget.Specifically, the Korean government will set up a foundation to support former Japanese Military comfort womans and use the Japanese government's budget to fund them. The two governments will cooperate to restore the honor and dignity of all former Japanese Military comfort womans and heal their wounds.
2. South Korea side:
(1) The South Korean government evaluates the Japanese government's announcement and the measures announced in paragraph 1.(2) above, and confirms that the Japanese government and the Japanese government will finally and irreversibly resolve the problem.The South Korean government will cooperate with the Japanese government's implementation of the measures.
Japanese Military comfort woman A major flaw in the scrapping of the agreement is President Moon Jae In's dissolution of the Reconciliation and Healing Foundation.
The comfort women agreement is an official agreement
South Korea does not understand the agreement
2015 Comfort Women Agreement
The claim date is from 1965. Comfort women agreement establishes foundation
With the dissolution of the foundation, former comfort women cannot negotiate with Japan
In 2021, Moon Jae-in recognized the comfort women agreement as an official agreement between the governments. I wonder if these words were uttered out of a feeling that further deterioration of Japan-Korea relations would be a problem because it would affect the economy, regarding the lawsuit filed by former comfort women against the Japanese government. The problem is that the South Korean side doesn't fully understand the contents of the 2015 agreement.
Reading the comfort women agreement, it is clear that the main purpose of the agreement is for the South Korean government to establish a ``foundation'' to support former comfort women. Based on this assumption, the comfort women issue between the two countries will be finally and irreversibly resolved. In addition, we will refrain from blaming or criticizing each other regarding this issue in the international community. The Korean government will strive to resolve the issue of the girl statue in front of the Japanese Embassy in South Korea appropriately through consultations with related organizations. The order is as follows.
2015 comfort women agreement
Japanese side:
(2) The Japanese government has been sincerely addressing this issue, and based on its experience, it has recently decided to use the Japanese government's budget to heal the emotional wounds of all former comfort women. Take measures to ease the situation. Specifically, the South Korean government established a foundation for the purpose of supporting former comfort women, provided a lump sum of funds from the Japanese government's budget, and the Japanese and South Korean governments cooperated to provide support for all former comfort women. We will carry out projects to restore the honor and dignity of comfort women and heal their emotional wounds.
2. South Korean side:
(1) The Korean government evaluates the Japanese government's statements and efforts leading up to this announcement, and the Japanese government has confirmed the above 1. On the premise that the measures stated in (2) are steadily implemented, through this announcement we confirm that, together with the Japanese government, this issue will be finally and irreversibly resolved. The Government of the Republic of Korea will cooperate with the measures taken by the Government of Japan.
The comfort women agreement states that the South Korean government will establish a foundation and work through its activities to resolve issues with former comfort women.
In other words, the entire premise of this comfort women agreement was the establishment of a foundation, and as expected, Moon Jae-in dissolved this foundation. If this is recognized as an official agreement, there is an obligation to rebuild the ``Foundation for Reconciliation and Healing.'' Since this has not been done, even if South Korea says something, it will simply be bringing up a topic unrelated to the comfort women agreement. The issue of claims was resolved in 1965.
The purpose of establishing the foundation is to carry out projects to restore the honor and dignity of former comfort women and to heal their emotional wounds. Nowhere does it say that Japan should simply distribute the 1 billion yen it contributed. In other words, South Korea has abandoned its efforts to establish a foundation and restore the honor and dignity of former comfort women.
Looking at this from a different angle, with this agreement, the comfort women issue is no longer an issue between the governments of the two countries, but an issue between the foundation and the individual former comfort women. The former comfort women are demanding that Japan's prime minister meet in person and apologize, which is an unlikely request, but let's assume it happened. That can only be the result of negotiations conducted through the Reconciliation and Healing Foundation. Without the Foundation, no one can negotiate with Japan. This is not an issue of claims or human rights, but rather an issue of default by the South Korean government, which has abandoned its efforts to establish a foundation and resolve the issue.
If you confuse the claim rights issue with the comfort women agreement, you will lose sight of the essence. The major flaw in the cancellation of this agreement is that it dissolves the Foundation.
postwar compensation and Roh Moo - hyun Japan is waiting for the old people to die.They say it's time-buying, but it's the other way around.So far, the Korean government has compensated the people several times after the war.Moon Jae In is the one who is trying to buy time just because the current government is fleeing.At the time of 2005, Japanese Military Sexual Slavery was not included, but Japan said it would not recognize government-led coercion, and it goes without saying that the 2015 Japanese Military Sexual Slavery agreement was comprehensive.
-----
In February 2004, the Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, demanding that five of the 57 documents related to the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement be released.The trial began in September 2002 when a group of bereaved families of Japanese victims of forced mobilization demanded that the government confirm the details of the Korea-Japan agreement.
As a result, Japan's compensation issue, which was temporarily settled after the signing of the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement in 1965, and compensation in the 1970s, has resurfaced.It's a kind of second round.
At that time, the government appealed on the grounds of its impact on bilateral relations.However, in August 2004, former President Roh Moo Hyun abandoned the appeal after consulting with Cheong Wa Dae, the chief civil society office, and the National Security Council (NSC) at a meeting of senior aides.
After the release of the claim agreement in January 2005, public opinion began that the amount of compensation paid by the government in 1975 was very small compared to that received by Japan.From 1975 to 1977, the Park Chung-hee administration spent 90 percent of its 300 million dollars on economic development and only 10 percent on compensation.Only 8,552 of the estimated 1.03 million victims of forced mobilization benefited.
Accordingly, the Roh Moo Hyun government has prepared follow-up measures.At that time, former President Roh Moo-hyun and Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan set four criteria: (1) support in other ways than legal compensation, (2) support through national compromise and consultation, and (4) support in parliament.To this end, the organization organized is the Public-Private Joint Committee.It consists of 21 people, including 10 private committee members, including Yang Samsung Law Firm Hwa-woo, Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan, and 11 government officials.
On 26 August 2005, the Joint Committee on Civil and Government Affairs announced the results of the following discussions.
(1) Anti-humanitarian illegal activities involving Japanese military forces such as Japanese Military Sexual Slavery, Sakhalin compatriots, and atomic bomb victims are not included in the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement.
(2) The $300 million loan received from Japan reflects the South Korean government's claim to Japan, such as personal property rights (insurance, deposits, etc.), bonds with Japan, and funds related to the resolution of forced mobilization damage.
(3) The South Korean government is morally responsible for using a considerable amount of free money received from Japan to help victims of forced mobilization (the South Korean government calculated $360 million in compensation for forced mobilization out of $1.22 billion requested from Japan in 1961).
(4) While continuing to hold the Japanese government accountable for the issue of Japanese Military Sexual Slavery, it will continue to raise the issue through international organizations.
Source article: 中央日報
