국제법적 관점에서 본 일본의 전관거류지 인식 －중국･조선에서의 일본 전관거류지 비교 시론－

This study compares Japan’s “exclusive settlements” established in Korea and China from an international-law perspective, clarifying their regional and chronological differences. In Korea, Japan’s exclusive settlements were characterized by a distinctly monopolistic nature－exclusive, proprietary, and single-national in operation. In contrast, the earlier exclusive concessions in China evolved into a more open system that, under the jurisdiction of the administering state, permitted third-country nationals to reside, hold land, and participate in municipal self-government. Although Japan, through the 1871 Sino-Japanese Treaty, obtained reciprocal rights of residence and trade in open ports, it did not establish exclusive settlements in China until after the First Sino-Japanese War. The “exclusive settlements” Japan subsequently founded in China codified prohibitions on land leasing to third-country nationals, effectively transplanting the Korean model into Chinese treaty ports. Contemporary international law scholar Imai Yoshiyuki (1915) conceptualized exclusive settlements as “colonies under international law” grounded in “territorial administrative jurisdiction,” yet maintained that any infringement upon the private legal rights of third-country nationals was unlawful. In this light, Japan’s exclusionary settlement policy－particularly its prohibition on third-country land leases－was legally invalid and, in practice, a contradictory measure detached from actual conditions.