Dismissal of 'Comfort Women Compensation Lawsuit' Decision Leaves Diplomatic Relations Between Korea and Japan in 'Fog'

[Asia Economy Reporter Yoo In-ho] Attention is focused on how the judiciary's ruling, which previously recognized the Japanese government's compensation responsibility for victims of the Japanese military's sexual slavery, will affect the already cooled relations between South Korea and Japan, as the court has now issued a completely opposite verdict in a similar lawsuit.

In diplomatic circles, there is analysis that it is difficult to judge whether this ruling will serve as a momentum or rather a negative factor in the absence of solutions to conflicts in Korea-Japan relations, including historical issues and the decision to discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant.

Since the opposite ruling worsens domestic public opinion, there is concern that negotiating with the Japanese government could backfire. Moreover, it is unlikely that the Japanese government will shift from its previously high-handed stance to come to the dialogue table in light of this ruling.

The Seoul Central District Court Civil Division 15 (Presiding Judge Min Sung-cheol) dismissed on the morning of the 21st a damages claim lawsuit filed by 20 victims and bereaved families, including the late grandmothers Kwak Ye-nam, Kim Bok-dong, and Lee Yong-soo, against Japan.

The court ruled in favor of the Japanese government, applying the principle of "state immunity," which means that a sovereign state is exempt from the jurisdiction of another country's courts.

This conclusion differs from the January 8 ruling that recognized the Japanese government's compensation responsibility on the grounds that state immunity cannot be applied to crimes against humanity.

Previously, the Seoul Central District Court Civil Division 34 (then Presiding Judge Kim Jeong-gon) ruled that the Japanese government must pay 100 million won per victim in a lawsuit filed by 12 comfort women victims, including the late grandmother Bae Chun-hee, on similar grounds.

The Japanese government strongly opposed that ruling, and since the South Korean government adhered to the principle of non-intervention in judicial decisions, there was no appropriate diplomatic solution, deepening the rift in Korea-Japan relations.

President Moon Jae-in even described the comfort women ruling as "indeed embarrassing" during his New Year's press conference on January 18, emphasizing his intention to improve Korea-Japan relations.

In this context, the second ruling stating that the Japanese government cannot be held responsible is seen as potentially easing the burden on the South Korean government.

There had been concerns that Korea-Japan relations could continue to be tested as similar lawsuits followed the first ruling.

The first ruling, which recognized the Japanese government's compensation responsibility, has already been finalized as Japan did not appeal, but forced execution against Japanese government assets, which could lead to a breakdown in Korea-Japan relations, has not yet been carried out.

Although the South Korean government has not yet issued a position on the second ruling, there is a sense of bewilderment as conflicting rulings have emerged in a situation where the judiciary's decisions must be respected.

There is also a view that it will not be easy for the government to consistently engage Japan with a unified logic while judicial judgments on this issue remain unsettled.

Japan may use this ruling to refute demands for remorse, apology, and reflection regarding the comfort women issue.

While this ruling is positive from the Japanese government's perspective, experts generally believe it is difficult to expect an immediate impact on Korea-Japan relations given the existence of the first ruling holding Japan responsible and the uncertainty of outcomes in future similar lawsuits.

Meanwhile, the Japanese government refrained from direct comments on the second ruling by the Korean court dismissing the damages claim lawsuit filed by comfort women victims against Japan on the grounds of "sovereign immunity" (state immunity), stating the need to analyze the ruling's content.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Kato Katsunobu said at a regular press conference on the morning of the same day, "This ruling came out differently from the January 8 ruling earlier this year," and added, "Since it is necessary to carefully analyze the content, the government will refrain from commenting at this point."

Regarding reports by Korean media on the previous ruling in January, where the plaintiffs who won the lawsuit sought to seize Japanese government assets in South Korea to secure litigation costs?a decision by the presiding court that raised concerns about violations of international law?Kato avoided direct comments, citing it as a "procedure within Korea."

However, he stated, "The January ruling (by another court) clearly violated international law and agreements between Korea and Japan," and said that the Japanese government could not accept it and has continuously demanded that the South Korean government take responsibility and take appropriate measures to correct this 'violation of international law.'

Regarding the impact of the ruling recognizing sovereign immunity on Korea-Japan relations, Kato reiterated, "It is difficult to comment without thoroughly analyzing the ruling's content."

He added, "We will continue to strongly demand that Korea take appropriate measures at the national level to correct violations of international law."