한일조약체제와 「식민지」책임의 국제법적 재조명

The Korea-Japan Treaty System in the perspective of the responsibility for colonial rule is classified as Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty system of 1910, The system of the Treaty of Peace with Japan of 1951(Treaty of San Francisco), The system of the Korea-Japan Basic Relations Treaty in 1965, Ruling system based on the responsibility for colonial rule started with scholars' a joint statement; "Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty is originally invalid" in 2010 and the Basic Relations Treaty semi-centennial system of 2015 which remains as a current issue and needs to historically follow-up. In this essay treaty systems are respectively reexamined legal issues on the international level and I try to seek for handling measures. Like the joint statement by Korean and Japanese scholars that "Japan -Korea Annexation Treaty is originally invalid", to eliminate illegality of Japanese colonial rule based on Japan-Korea Annexation treaty of 1910 concluded through coercion which can be invalid due to invasion, the Annex agreement of the Basic Relations Treaty relates to the right of claim must include the right to demand reparation. Besides the claim of the Japanese sovereignty over Dokdo started since illegal colonial rule period needs to review that Japan specified that Dokdo conquered with violence and greed by Japan would be treated separately from the Japanese territory in Cairo Declaration(1943) and in Potsdam Declaration(1945). Under the premises that the Japan-Korea Annexation in 1910 is legitimate including the "unjust but valid" theory, Japanese government has been disregarding the post-war responsibility. Korea has had no legal basis to claim for post-war reparations as Korea was excluded from the Allied Powers as well as is a non-contracting party to Treaty of Peace with Japan of 1951. Proclaiming that the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty is originally nullified through the joint statement of intellectuals in 2010, the foundation is laid for the first time for discussing post-war reparations including responsibility of illegal colonial rule by Japan excluded even in the Basic Agreement of 1965. Moreover, the Constitutional Court ruled a decision on unconstitutionality of omission regarding Japanese military's Comfort Women and atom bomb victim issues based on arbitration on the Korean-Japanese claim agreement article 3 in August 2011 and the Supreme Court rendered a verdict related to appeal for redress for the compulsory manpower draft of 12 years duration that Japan's Judgment which regards the colonial rule as legitimate is against the core value of Constitution of Republic of Korea. Therefore, at this point with only three years before the 50th anniversary for the "Basic Agreement of 1965", we need to clear up such problems of the responsibility for colonial rule on the perspective of international law based on the Korean-Japanese intellectuals' joint statement that Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty is originally null and void. By doing so, Korea-Japan Basic Treaty System which becomes half a century in 2015 after entering into the Korea-Japan Basic Agreement must contribute to build peaceful and prosperous North East Asia era on the perspective of international law overcoming the fundamental problems of historical conflicts and finding a way of true history reconciliation.