Japanese Military comfort woman recruited through a newspaper contest. There are many questions about forced arrests from a necessity point of view.
2022-02-06
Category:Japanese comfort woman problem I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Was it necessary to force Japanese Military comfort woman to be taken?
The most questionable point is whether forced arrest of Japanese Military comfort woman was necessary.Lee Yong-soo, who is said to be a former Japanese Military comfort woman, said that the sex industry exists in modern countries and Japan, and that the balance between supply and demand seems to be balanced.In other words, the percentage of men who seek this and women who provide services as a profession.How about in Korea?It is not a situation where people should be forcibly taken away even if they omit ethical issues related to sexual morals.By the way, Japan's unemployment rate stood at ２.８ percent in September.
The Korean Peninsula was modernized under Japanese rule
At that time, many people on the Korean Peninsula were too poor to find jobs, but the unemployment rate dropped dramatically due to Japanese investment, and Joseon itself was surprisingly modernized and developed.Japan was never rich during the war, but men would have to hire them first to get a job.Are there more women who need jobs financially than now?The proportion of men and women after birth or in nature is about １:１ .It's a simple arithmetic problem.
Newspaper Public Offering for Japanese Military comfort women
Japanese Military comfort woman is open to the public through newspaper advertisements, as left as data from that time.And prostitution itself was legal under the laws of the time.In addition, they are paid several times as much as college-graduated men.That seems to have gathered enough people.There are many questions as to why ３００,０００ people were forcibly taken away.
POINT At that time, Japanese Military comfort woman was paid a lot of money, and when I returned to Korea, I got enough money to buy a house in just about two years.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Korean group trying to stop the comfort women movement in South Korea The method is to stay up all night and reserve a space first.
Preemption of space for South Korean far-right groups began in May 2020. In the wake of allegations of misappropriation of sponsorship funds by Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang, who served as the president of the Justice and Remembrance Solidarity (a core organization in the comfort women litigation movement), far-right civic groups held a rally in front of the Statue of the Girl of Peace. They began filing reports ahead of the Justice League.
Meeting notifications can be submitted 30 days (720 hours) in advance, but members of far-right and conservative groups are staying up all night taking turns at the waiting area at Jongno Police Station, where meeting notifications are accepted. , the place is taken away every time.
Although it is a primitive method, it is amazing that they are trying to stop the comfort women movement even by staying up all night.
Kang Kyung-ran, head of the Solidarity Movement for Justice League, said, ``Far-right groups are claiming to ``end the Wednesday demonstrations forever'' and have filed a gathering at the same location. She is a prostitute () on a daily basis, and she does not hesitate to say things that insult us.
I have decided to petition the National Human Rights Commission to take urgent remedial measures and investigate the human rights violations occurring at the rally site, as well as to investigate the police who ignore these acts."
The anti-comfort women movement in South Korea is led by far-right political parties and carried out by civil society groups.
What is the main purpose of the comfort women agreement? The purpose is for the Korean side to establish a foundation for reconciliation and resolution - South Korea does not understand the main purpo
I don't understand anything about this article (below).Apparently, the former Japanese Military comfort woman refused to receive 1 billion yen donated by Japan in the 2015 Japanese Military comfort woman agreement, so the Korean government donated 1 billion yen to establish a gender equality fund.
In the first place, the Moon Jae In administration and Korean public opinion have been excluded, but the Japanese government has not donated 1 billion yen directly to the former Japanese Military comfort woman.The South Korean government has set up a foundation to support the former Japanese Military comfort woman and provided funds for the foundation.The Korean government's activities and foundation will settle the dispute with the former Japanese Military comfort woman.Since it was a public interest foundation, it would be good to raise new public works projects and funds through the foundation's activities and increase the amount of funds to solve the problem.Japan and South Korea agreed on the Japanese Military comfort woman agreement.The fact that the former Japanese Military comfort woman refused to accept the 1 billion yen donated by Japan itself is contrary to the intent of the Japanese Military comfort woman agreement.
Moon Jae In has dissolved the Reconciliation and Healing Foundation, and one billion yen has not been repaid to Japan, and it has reportedly invested one billion yen in establishing a new Gender Equality Fund.In any case, it is clear that the South Korean government will take the initiative in solving the problem.
[2015 Japanese Military comfort woman Agreement]
Japan side:
(2) Based on this experience, the Japanese government has taken measures to heal the wounds of all former Japanese Military comfort womans based on the Japanese government's budget.Specifically, the Korean government will set up a foundation to support former Japanese Military comfort womans and use the Japanese government's budget to fund them. The two governments will cooperate to restore the honor and dignity of all former Japanese Military comfort womans and heal their wounds.
2. South Korea side:
(1) The South Korean government evaluates the Japanese government's announcement and the measures announced in paragraph 1.(2) above, and confirms that the Japanese government and the Japanese government will finally and irreversibly resolve the problem.The South Korean government will cooperate with the Japanese government's implementation of the measures.
Legality of Japanese Annexation of Korea The Supreme Court's decision on recruitment is based on the unilateral recognition of torts under Japanese rule. There are two main points in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Korea. One is the issue of the Japan-Korea Claims Agreement. The second is the recognition of torts under Japanese rule, which was the premise of the decision.
The waiver of claims in post-war processing was under the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights related to claims. Countries that do not ratify the peace treaty will individually conclude a treaty. Diplomatic protection means that the country does not diplomatically protect the exercise of claims against other countries. A-bomb survivors in Hiroshima have attempted to claim damages against the United States for indiscriminate attacks on civilians as a tort. At this time, the view of the Government of Japan is that the Government of Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights and the government is not involved. However, he replied that the individual's claim was not extinguished. "Yanagi answer". It is the answer of the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs and the administrative view.
In fact, South Korea has been activating the movement for individual claims by quoting this Yanai answer. Until then, South Korea, on the contrary, interpreted that the individual's claim itself had disappeared (described in the Korean side manual of the 1965 Agreement), and after hearing this Yanai's answer, he knew for the first time that the individual's claim would not be extinguished. It was. Aside from the administrative view of Japan, the legal view was that in 2007 the Supreme Court of Japan stated that it was not subject to protection, including individual jurisdiction. At the same time, the individual's claim right will not be extinguished.
In other words, the problem is that a treaty is a promise between countries, not a contract between individual citizens. Individuals do not lose their claims as individual rights, but the state does not act for them. The Supreme Court of Korea interpreted that the jurisdiction would not be extinguished. The first point is whether or not jurisdiction is included.
Regarding the second tort recognition, when Japan signed the 1965 Agreement, Japan is approaching the conclusion with a consistent view that the annexation of Korea is not an illegal act under international law. The eight articles presented by the South Korean side in the agreement are about claims for the property of natural persons (individuals), but it is written and agreed in the agreement to abandon them. And it is not the concept of compensation, but economic cooperation.
The Japanese annexation of Korea is not illegal because there is no fact that Japan occupied it by force and forcibly concluded it, and it was signed and stamped when the two countries signed the agreement. The letter of the emperor Sunjong's name is written on the power of attorney to delegate full authority to Prime Minister Ye Wanyong, and there is no debate about whether this is a signature, and Sunjong itself is not recognized as an emperor. There is a claim that there is no signature of Gojong, but the universal public law of international law at that time stipulates that the signature of the head of state is not always necessary for concluding a treaty.
The reason why tort recognition is the point is that the Korean side ignored the views and interpretations under international law and unilaterally recognized it as tort. Korean civil law stipulates that personal property rights and claims will be extinguished if not exercised for 20 years. In other words, normally, both the recruiter and the comfort woman have passed the extinction prescription of the claim. Looking at the cases of claims related to the claim right at the time of the annexation of Japan and South Korea in South Korea, there are a number of judgments that were dismissed because of the extinction prescription. What happens if the Japanese annexation of Korea becomes an illegal act? The claim right at point 1 does not expire. Since it is a principle of international law that the right to claim under tort has no statute of limitations, the Daiho-in Temple has unfoundedly recognized the annexation of Korea as a tort.
As mentioned above, an individual's claim will not be extinguished only on the premise of tort. The treaty exists as another matter, it is a promise between countries, and the Korean government has a strict obligation to keep the treaty.
Korean anti - Japanese activities taking place in New York: How should we deal with them, as they are so outrageous?
In November 2019, the Korea Liberation Association urged the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to ban the use of the Rising Sun flag at the upcoming 2020 Tokyo Olympics in Manhattan Square, New York, United States. marching through the city.
The person who is kneeling down on the ground is Kim Won-eun, the chairman of the Gwangjukai. It is said that Japan is losing to South Korea's lobbying efforts, but this is the reality. Japanese people are not aware that they are conducting activities like this in the United States, a completely different country, which is completely based on no facts and deviates from common sense.
The Gwangbuk-kai, which refers to independence from Japan as Gwangbuk, is the central organization for anti-Japanese activities tied to the so-called Korean government.
In South Korea, there are many anti-Japanese organizations that receive support from the government.
They proudly print a historical error that equates the Nazis with Japan on flags and march through the streets of New York.
They are using this to appeal to the American people to ban the use of the Rising Sun flag at the Tokyo Olympics, which is another logically bankrupt activity, but they don't care about that.
The Nazis were a socialist party that practiced dictatorship and massacred six million Jews.
Japan's Greater East Asia War was a war of Western colonial liberation in Asia, and the only things Japan has in common with the Nazis are that the enemy was a power that continued to expand through colonial rule, and that they lost the war.
The Japan-German-Italy Tripartite Pact was not about jointly fighting a war, but rather a non-interference pact that stipulated that Japan would not intervene in wars in Europe, and Germany and Italy would not intervene in wars in Asia.
South Korea conveniently cites the Nazis and criticizes Japan. They know very little about the difference between Japan and the Nazis.
South Korea's UNIQLO turns into a large profit.Where did the boycott movement go?Have we forgotten the past?
FRF El Korea, which operates Uniqlo in South Korea, has announced its results for fiscal year 2021 (September 1, 2020 to August 31, 2021).
Operating profit was 52.9 billion won (approximately 5.1 billion yen), a significant turnaround from a deficit of 88.4 billion won in the previous fiscal year. The company aimed to improve profits by reorganizing existing stores, and strengthened sales at its online store in response to increased demand for online shopping due to the spread of the new coronavirus.
One industry source said in an interview, ``The year after the boycott movement, the new coronavirus broke out.Uniqlo's shift to online was a blessing in disguise.''
Even in the midst of a country-wide boycott movement, it is amazing to see a return to surplus. The reason behind this seems to be the expansion of online shopping due to the coronavirus.
Fast Retailing's CFO Ken Okazaki said that ``boycotts will not last long,'' which infuriated the Korean media, and the fierce criticism of UNIQLO became heated.
Also, in the Korean UNIQLO commercial, a 13-year-old woman asks, "How did you used to dress when you were my age?" and a 98-year-old woman asks, "How did you use to dress when you were my age?" The woman further sparked a boycott by saying, "Oh my god, I can't remember that far back." as insulting to comfort women.
The 98-year-old woman was 13 years old during the Japanese colonial era, but she thought it was an insult to forget that. Looking at the results, CFO Okazaki's prediction was correct.
If he asked the boycotters about this, would he say, "I can't remember that far back"?
FCO Okazaki seems to have a good understanding of the Korean national character of getting hot easily and getting cold easily. In addition, there seem to be many people who completely ignore self-contradiction.
