[Column] Sighs and Criticism in the Legal Community: "Rulings More Influenced by Government Than Supreme Court"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] Defeats in court are always bitter for lawyers.

It is even more so for lawyers filing lawsuits against Japan. They have a heavy workload and must be on their feet constantly. Since most cases are against Japanese government authorities or companies based in Japan, they frequently visit the Japanese Embassy. They also take care of mostly elderly victims and monitor the reactions of Japanese media. Although they do not wear the Taegeuk mark, they carry the sense of duty of so-called 'national representatives' competing in a Korea-Japan match.

Therefore, defeats in lawsuits hurt even more. On the 7th, when the 34th Civil Division of the Seoul Central District Court dismissed a damages lawsuit filed by about 80 forced labor victims against 16 Japanese companies, they sighed in frustration. This ruling is even more controversial because it overturned the Supreme Court's October 2018 plenary decision that "the victims' claims for consolation money are not included in the scope of the Korea-Japan Claims Agreement."

One lawyer sharply criticized, "They excluded the decision of the Supreme Court plenary session with 13 justices and, as if the government sent a sign like a coach signaling when a runner is on base in baseball, the court ruled by following the government's sign." This implies the court ruled while watching the government's stance.

Many in the legal community share these suspicions. Given the circumstances, such voices are inevitable. Coincidentally, President Moon Jae-in said at the New Year's press conference on January 18 that he felt "embarrassed" by the ruling recognizing Japan's compensation responsibility for comfort women victims, and the courts changed their posture.

This remark came 10 days after the ruling by the 34th Civil Division of the Seoul Central District Court. At that time, the court ruled in favor of 12 comfort women victims, including the late grandmother Bae Chun-hee, ordering Japan to pay each plaintiff 100 million won in damages.

Two months after President Moon's remark, the court personnel changed due to regular judicial appointments, and the court decided that the victorious grandmothers could not receive litigation costs from Japan. Presiding Judge Kim Yang-ho said, "There are no litigation costs that can be collected from the defendant (Japan) among the litigation costs for which the state allowed the plaintiffs (comfort women victims) to defer payment."

Judge Kim applied the same reasoning to dismiss the forced labor victims' lawsuit on the 7th. The damages claim by 20 victims, including grandmother Lee Yong-soo, who suffered from Japanese military sexual slavery, was also dismissed by the Seoul Central District Court in April. Because of this, another lawyer said President Moon's remark was "even disappointing."

Meanwhile, there are talks that our government is seeking to improve relations with Japan. As President Moon is attending the G7 summit in the UK from the 11th to the 13th, the possibility of a Korea-US-Japan or Korea-Japan summit is also being mentioned. In this situation, the courts' dismissal of lawsuits against Japan may be coincidental, but victims, lawyers, and the legal community feel uncomfortable seeing this situation.

The court is at risk of being stigmatized as an 'icon of distrust' due to the ruling on the 7th. The backlash is fierce. A petition to impeach Judge Kim, who made the ruling, was submitted to the Blue House and received over 200,000 signatures. The Public Officials Union Court Headquarters and the Justice Memory Solidarity condemned the ruling. On the 9th, Lee Na-young, director of the Justice Memory Solidarity, strongly criticized the court at the regular Wednesday rally, saying, "They have turned back the clock of history to the colonial-era Seoul court."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.