한일청구권협정과 강제징용 피해자의 손해배상청구권 - 대법원 2018. 10. 30. 선고 2013다61381 판결 -

This case is related to the Supreme Court en banc Decision of 2013Da61381. The core issue of this case is whether or not claims for damage of the korean victims of forced labour have expired as a result of the conclusion of the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement. This is basically a matter of interpretation of the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court ruled that the claims for damage were not expired because the claims for damage are not covered by the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement. This paper interprets the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement in the following way. First, the principles of interpreting the treaty of the Vienna Convention, as well as of the principle of constitutional law interpretation, are also applied. Second, the purpose and application of the the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement are strictly classified and interpreted. Third, the principle of interpreting the treaty of the Vienna Convention is applied in stages by dividing it into one-step interpretation and two-step interpretation. The interpretation of the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement in this way led to the conclusions of the majority opinion of the Supreme Court. The claims for damage are based on the illegality of Japanese colonial rule. It is reasonable to exclude such claims from the purpose and application of the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement. Therefore, the claims for damage do not expire. The fundamental problem of the conflict between Korea and Japan in this case is that the Korean and Japanese governments entered into the Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement without agreement on the illegality of Japanese colonial rule. Both Korea and Japan should pursue a new approach to overcome the dark past of 20th-century imperialism and colonialism, and to build an East Asian peace community, including the two countries, based on mutual understanding and respect.