애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문중앙법학2014.03 발행KCI 피인용 6

1905년 일본의 독도편입 증거에 대한 국제법적 분석

Analysis of Evidences concerning the 1905 Japanese Territorial Incorporation of Dokdo under International Law

제성호(중앙대학교)

16권 1호, 195~222쪽

초록

The decision of the Japanese Cabinet adopted on January 28, 1905 for the incorporation of Dokdo was made to clarify its government's will to add the small islet to the Japanese territory. It was not published officially. Instruction No. 87 of the Japanese Minister of Domestic Affairs in 1905 was given to local government office in accordance with the cabinet decision. But the instruction was merely an internal expression of intention to the lower authorities in the then Japanese administrative system. Besides, the original of Shimane Prefecture Notice 40 does not exist at this time. The existing one is not exactly a copy of the original document. So it could not be said to be a duplicate. Even though it could be regarded as a real copy, it would not be recognized having evidentiary value the same as that of the original. At most, it can have a restricted provative value as a secondary or circumstantial evidence. It's because there are no official seal at the Shimane Prefectural notification. The Notice 40 was likely to go into the local gazette of Shimane Prefecture. In spite of that high probability, such publication was nothing but local notification. In any case, it did not amount to international notification on the part of central government. Also there were no international procedures for the announcement or inquiry related to territorial incorporation. Considering these facts, the announcement by the Shimane Prefectural gazette could not bring about lawful occupation of Dokdo under international law.

Abstract

The decision of the Japanese Cabinet adopted on January 28, 1905 for the incorporation of Dokdo was made to clarify its government's will to add the small islet to the Japanese territory. It was not published officially. Instruction No. 87 of the Japanese Minister of Domestic Affairs in 1905 was given to local government office in accordance with the cabinet decision. But the instruction was merely an internal expression of intention to the lower authorities in the then Japanese administrative system. Besides, the original of Shimane Prefecture Notice 40 does not exist at this time. The existing one is not exactly a copy of the original document. So it could not be said to be a duplicate. Even though it could be regarded as a real copy, it would not be recognized having evidentiary value the same as that of the original. At most, it can have a restricted provative value as a secondary or circumstantial evidence. It's because there are no official seal at the Shimane Prefectural notification. The Notice 40 was likely to go into the local gazette of Shimane Prefecture. In spite of that high probability, such publication was nothing but local notification. In any case, it did not amount to international notification on the part of central government. Also there were no international procedures for the announcement or inquiry related to territorial incorporation. Considering these facts, the announcement by the Shimane Prefectural gazette could not bring about lawful occupation of Dokdo under international law.

발행기관:
중앙법학회
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.21759/caulaw.2014.16.1.195
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
1905년 일본의 독도편입 증거에 대한 국제법적 분석 | 중앙법학 2014 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI