메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
박경신 (고려대학교)
저널정보
전북대학교 동북아법연구소 동북아법연구 동북아법연구 제16권 제1호
발행연도
2022.4
수록면
569 - 603 (35page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The redress and reparation efforts for the “comfort women” of the Japanese military during the Pacific War have been hampered in their home countries by the state immunity doctrine. In this paper, we first evaluate the current state of jurisprudence on state immunity doctrine, especially as expressed in the seminal 2012 Ferrini ICJ decision. There the concept of “armed forces” has been emphatically commandeered to bolster the strict application of state immunity, and a full legal analysis under the state immunity doctrine, namely, that of the putative exception of “territorial torts,” was cut short by the court upon their finding of the element of “armed conflicts”, “armed forces”. However, the reason for making exceptions to state immunity is that state actions are sometimes not exercises of sovereignty but private commercial acts such as e.g., hiring, contracting, property owning or private civil acts such as negligently causing damages inside the forum state, etc. Japan’s mobilization and maintenance of ‘comfort women’ and ‘comfort stations’ does not constitute ‘armed conflicts’, the quintessential exercises of sovereignty. It was the result of colonialism whereby men and women of occupied territories within the empire were forced into most subservient and inhumane roles in the intra-empire economy supplying its imperial war efforts. The evolution of jurisprudence on exceptions to state immunity should not be shut down easily with respect to ‘comfort women’ issues on the ground of a nexus to “armed forces”, “armed conflicts.” For subject matter relevance, the less well-known 1992 Weltover decision of the US Supreme Court interpreting the American codification of the state immunity doctrine is instructive, where it characterized purchase of bullets and other military supplies as a commercial act exempt from state immunity. Such shut-down of the full analysis is especially worrying because it is during ‘armed conflicts’ that worst tragedies especially against women take place and they happen at the hands of ‘armed forces’. The Japanese military, as the end-customer of ‘comfort services’, solicited/procured and paid for ‘comfort services’ to reduce the cost of the war. These private legal acts incentivized the private contractors into recruiting Korean women already impoverished under colonialism by deceit and into treating the Korean women thus recruited harshly and inhumanely during the ‘comfort services’. Throughout the relevant periods, the Japanese military set the specifications of the services to be delivered, exercising its prerogative as the end-customer and primary contractor. It is for this role as a joint tortfeasor in the “territorial tort” of fraudulent human trafficking and also as a purchaser in the “commercial activity “ of purchasing ‘comfort services’ that the modern Japanese government should be held accountable in a Korean court of law despite state immunity.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0