During the World War Ⅱ,Japan governed Korea at that time. And then Japanese conpanies brought persons to Japan as a labor resource. Bereaved families has gone to court because the persons who was brought to Japan felt affliction.
At that time, Japan was very poor country because of the war. And most of mens got drafted to war field. Therefore labor resource was not enough. It was one of the reason that Japanese companies brought the persons from Korea. I mentioned again,Japan was very poor,therefore working environment also might be not good.
Now, this issue is one of the reason for conflict between Japan and South Korea.
Let's see each position,
This issue was solved by the agreement between Japan and Korea in 1965.
The agreement involved the articles about economic cooperation,completely finalized to solve claim right and diplomatic normalization. Therefore Japan has insisted this issue was completely finalized by the agreement.
Individual claim right is still exsistense. South Korean high court allowed it as their adjugement.
There is different position,so this is the reason of conflict.
And then I mention about counter evidences to Korean positon as below,
1. Exsistence of Individual claim right
Below is a part of the agreement in 1965.
(Abstract website Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan）
Japan and the Republic of Korea have built a close, friendly and cooperative relationship based on the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea and other relevant agreements that the two countries concluded when they normalized their relationship in 1965. The Agreement on the Settlement of Problems concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Co-operation between Japan and the Republic of Korea (the “Agreement”), which is the core of these agreements, stipulates that Japan shall supply to the Republic of Korea 300 million USD in grants and extend loans up to 200 million USD (Article I), and that problems concerning property, rights and interests of the two Contracting Parties and their nationals (including juridical persons), as well as concerning claims between the Contracting Parties and their nationals, are “settled completely and finally,” and no contention shall be made thereof (Article II). As such, the Agreement has provided the basis for the bilateral relationship up until now.
The minutes of agreement for claim right mentions that disappearing matter by this article is only the right which it is allowed as proprietary nature. It means only proprietary(Land,Building,etc), right(damage compensation of war time laborers,etc), and benefit was disappeared. This means that the claim right which is not icluded proprietary nature is not disappered. However if a complainer claims to the country or nation(include company) sing this claim right , accused side doesn't have any obligation to comply because the proprietary right was disappeared by the agreement for claim right.
Therefore "claiming it is possible,but it is not bailed. This is legal point of view.
2. Korea insisted to solve the war time laborers issue as themselves, not to handle by Japan.
Japan thougth " Governing Korea was a comply according to international law", but Korea thought " it was iregal governing". These position has not changed from at the beggining of negotiation for diplomatic normalization to today.
The diplomay record which was disclosed by Korean government mentioned about progress of negotiation for diplomatic normalization. This record mentioned what did each countries want to solve war time laborers when there was different position.
Below is abstract
1961,April,28 5th,Japan - Korea meeting , committee of general claim right 12th meeting
Japan; What is a compensation for war time laborer ?
Korea; Compensation for living,injured and deceased person. It is for mental affliction.
Japan; These claim was not solved because there was not diplomatic relationship at that time.When the diplomatic relationship works, it could be solved by Japanese general law as one of way
Korea：There are several ways to solve the issue, we will sovle it instead of Japan.
Korea required compensation for war time laborers because of their mental affliction. Japan suggest to bail to indiviuals. However Korea insis to solve it by Korean government instead of Japan.
1961,May,10 5th,Japan - Korea meeting , committee of general claim right 13th meeting
Korea：Korea claims a compensation for mental and physical affiliction that Japan forced to bring other country's person
Japan：When they were brought , they were Japanese nation. Therefore Does Korea claim same thing as Japanese government supplied to Japanese person ?
Korea：You say the persons were brought as Japanese nation,but we don't have such thinking. Japan forced to bring the persons. We hope you to correct your thought.
Japan：Do you mean that Japan should give compensation individually ?
Korea：We claim as the country. We will solve individual issue internally
Japan：We think Japan will take action to Korean person too as much as possible.
Korea：We think the compensation must be done by internally
Japan：We understand that Korea thinks it is new basic(the people was brought as other nation's person),but we can't understand the compensation will be based on individually.
Korea：Japan gives compensation to Japanese person who were dececead or injured person. Japan must give appropriate compensation to the person who were brought as other nation person and also had mental and physical affliction.
Japan：We think it is the best to pay compensation individually according to Japanese support law. Japan feels responsibility and Japan feels sorry not to take action to the person.
Korea：We will pay by ourselves as internal action. We think Japan doesn't need to do it.
Japane insisted to give compensation individually several times.However Korea refused it and they insisted to do it by government.
When we see legal point of view and negotiation prosess of claim right agreement, Korean government has to solve this issue by themselves. That is their responsibility to Korean person.
I hope many poeple in the world to understand this fact.