Korean District Court – rejected former comfort women's claim for compensation - Japanese sovereign immunity applied

Recently Nihon Keizai Shimbun Electronic Edition reported the following:

元慰安婦の賠償請求却下　韓国地裁、日本の主権免除適用

朝鮮半島

2021年4月21日 11:08 (2021年4月21日 13:12更新)

 【ソウル=恩地洋介】韓国の元従軍慰安婦らが日本政府を相手取り損害賠償を求めた訴訟で、ソウル中央地裁は21日、国家は外国の裁判権に服さないとする国際法上の「主権免除の原則」を認め、訴えを却下した。地裁は1月、別の元慰安婦訴訟で日本政府に賠償を命じており、正反対の判決内容となった。

今回の訴訟は元慰安婦の李容洙（イ・ヨンス）氏や遺族ら20人が2016年に提起。「精神的、肉体的な苦痛を受けた」として計約30億ウォン（約2億8千万円）の損害賠償を日本政府に請求した。日本政府は主権免除の原則の立場から、公判には一度も出席していない。

判決は主権免除について「国際慣習法と最高裁の判例から、外国の主権的行為に対する損害賠償は認められない」との判断を示した。慰安婦問題の解決は、日本政府との外交交渉を含め「韓国の対内外的な努力により達成されなければならない」と指摘した。

慰安婦問題の最終解決をうたった15年日韓合意の有効性にも言及した。合意に基づいて設立された「和解・癒やし財団」から多数の原告が支援金を受け取っており、「救済手段」になっているとの認識を示した。原告の元慰安婦16人のうち9人（故人含む）が支援金を受け取っていたことが判明している。

原告側の弁護士は判決後、記者団に「納得しがたい判決だ」と述べ、控訴を検討する考えを示した。

ソウル地裁は1月、別の元慰安婦訴訟で、日本政府に原告1人当たり1億ウォンの慰謝料支払いを命じた。日本政府は控訴せず、判決はすでに確定している。

1月の判決では訴訟費用についても、被告の日本政府が負担する判断を示していた。ただ、ソウル中央地裁は3月下旬、訴訟費用の確保を目的とした日本政府資産の差し押さえは「国際法違反を招きかねない」とする決定文を原告側に通知した。

この決定は訴訟費用を巡る問題に限られるが、地裁は今後、賠償金の差し押さえについても同様の判断を下す可能性がある。原告側は日本政府が韓国内で所有する財産の開示を求める手続きを裁判所に申し立てるなど、差し押さえに向けた準備を進めている。

文在寅（ムン・ジェイン）大統領は1月の判決後、15年の日韓合意について「政府間の公式合意だ」と認め、日本と解決策を協議したい意向を示した。韓国政府は原告からヒアリングを進めたが、解決策を提案するには至っていない。

Translation

[Seoul = Yosuke Onchi] In a lawsuit in which former South Korean comfort women sought damages against the Japanese government, the Seoul Central District Court said on the 21st that it acknowledged “the principle of sovereign immunity” in that a state would not submit to foreign jurisdiction, and thus dismissed the proceedings. In January in another former comfort women proceeding, a district court ordered the Japanese government to compensate and the content of the decision was the exact opposite.

The present proceeding was filed in 2016 by former comfort women Lee Yong-soo and her bereaved family. They claimed a total of about 3 billion won (about 280 million yen) in damages from the Japanese government, saying that they had suffered mental and physical pain. The Government of Japan had never attended a trial because of the principle of sovereignty exemption.

In the ruling, regarding the sovereignty exemption, it was ruled that " based on customary international law and the Supreme Court's case law, damage payment requests would not permitted due foreign sovereign acts." It was pointed out that, about a resolution on the comfort women issue, including diplomatic negotiations with the Japanese government, it "must be achieved by South Korea's internal and external efforts."

The validity of the 2015 Japan-Korea Agreement, which stipulated the final solution to the comfort women issue was also mentioned. Many plaintiffs had previously received support from the "Reconciliation and Healing Foundation" established based on this agreement, and had acknowledged that they were "relief measures". It was found out that nine out of the 16 plaintiffs of former comfort women (including those deceased) had received the relief money.

After the decision, the plaintiff's lawyer told reporters that the decision was "unconvincing," and said he would consider appealing.

In January, in another former comfort women proceeding, the Seoul District Court ordered the Japanese government to pay 100 million won in compensation per plaintiff. The Japanese government did not appealed and the decision was already finalized.

The January ruling also indicated that the Japanese government as a defendant had to bear the costs of the proceedings. However, in late March, the Seoul Central District Court notified the plaintiffs about a decision which stated that the seizure of Japanese government assets for the purpose of securing legal costs "may lead to violations of international laws."

This decision was limited to legal costs, the district court might make similar decisions regarding the seizure for damage payments in the future. The plaintiffs were preparing for seizure, such as filing a lawsuit with the court requesting the disclosure of property owned by the Japanese government in South Korea.

After the decision in January, President Moon Jae-in (文在寅) acknowledged that the Japan-Korea agreement in 2015 was "an official agreement between the governments," and expressed his intention to discuss a solution with Japan. The South Korean government had proceeded with hearings from the plaintiffs, but had not yet come up with a solution.

              For me, it is hard to believe that the courts in South Korea are still handling cases that seek damages from Japan over the comfort women matter happened more than 70 years ago. It is a difficult case for President Moon Jae-in (文在寅) to handle and a test on his political wisdom.