Research On The International Law Of Korean Civil Claims Against Japan

Since the Supreme Court of the republic of Korea made a final decision on <The case of compensation for Japanese forced labor(The following is simply called “the Forced labor case”)> in 2018,it has attracted extensive attention and heated discussion in the academic community.The decisions of the Supreme Court involve many legal departments and are crucial to the protection of the rights of civil war victims.From the perspective of international law,this paper discusses comprehensively the basis of international law,the interpretation of the right of claim agreement,the limitation of action,the refusal to recognize the Japanese judgment and other issues involved in the judgment of the forced labor case,and divides the text into the following parts:The first part mainly introduces the background facts and victimization contents of the case of forced labor,as well as the overview of the judgment of the Japanese court and the Korean court.The Supreme Court of South Korea held that the Japanese judgment should not be recognized because it was contrary to the public order of South Korea.Therefore,the court of South Korea rejected the Japanese judgment and re-examined the case.The main content of the case with the characteristics of international civil litigation was the research object of the paper.The second part studies the legal basis of civil claims against Japan.Whether the individual victim has the qualification as a subject of international law,and what international rights he/she enjoys according to <the Hague Convention>and <Forced Labour Convention>.Then,the application of international treaties is discussed.Because the international treaties do not specify the conditions and legal effects of the right of compensation,the relevant provisions of international treaties cannot be directly applied in the process of litigation in South Korea,and only article 750 of the civil code of South Korea can be applied to require the wrongdoer to compensate for the losses.The third part analyzes the relationship between <the Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims between the Republic of Korea and Japan(The following is simply called “Claims Settlement Agreement”)> and individual claims for compensation.With <Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty> as the standard for the interpretation of Claims Settlement Agreement,it cannot be considered that the right to compensation for war and the infringement caused by war has been eliminated in the agreement.Even if the state renounces war reparations,individual citizens can still claim compensation for the damage they have suffered.The fourth part studies extinctive prescription involved in the Forced labor case.The starting point of extinctive prescription is “When the right can be exercised.” Its starting point should be identified as “the period during which the exercise of rights can be expected.” Especially similar to this case,when it comes to the infringement ACTS carried out under the guidance of the state,the Japanese side holds the defense of extinctive prescription is a violation of the principle of the greatest honesty of the abuse of rights,which is the latest precedent tendency of the Korean court.From the point of view that war compensation is not applicable to extinctive prescription,civil war victims can also claim damages.The fifth part analyzes the issue of refusal to recognize the judgment of Japanese court.As one of the reasons for refusing to recognize foreign judgments,“Public policy” has a rich connotation.Through the study of the public order theory,this paper discusses whether the Korean court can refuse to recognize the Japanese court's judgment.Acknowledged Japan's decision,in violation of the “substantial” and “international” public policy and violate the legal principles(Korean constitution law article 10 and its basic),its principle is that the legal nature of the problem in our country,the basic concept of moral belief,or fundamental values and justice,for violating degree big and acknowledge the effectiveness of the Japanese court's judgment will be more than we can accept the scope of the review is a must,therefore,South Korea court needs to comprehensive review of the plaintiff requests.