강제징용 '배상' 확정, 유사소송 전망과 정부 대응은?

It took 13 years for South Korea's Supreme Court to rule on the forced labor by a Japanese company during World War 2.
Attention now shifts to what will happen to similar lawsuits pending in court.
Choi Si-young has the full story.
Thirteen years after a lawsuit for damages was filed against Nippon Steel and Sumitomo Metal at the Seoul Central District Court in 2005, South Korea's Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday the Japanese company pay compensation... of roughly 90-thousand U.S. dollars...to the four victims of forced labor.
The ruling came after more than 5 years of deliberation by the highest court.
Will the ruling's outcome affect similar lawsuits?
According to the Korean Bar Association, out of 14 lawsuits against Japanese company filed by forced laborers, two complaints against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries are pending at the top court.
"The Supreme Court's ruling is the first of its kind on forced labor during Japan's colonial rule. It will have a direct effect on future rulings on similar lawsuits."
The Japanese government had argued and still contends that the 1965 agreement... "Concerning the Settlement of Problems in Regard to Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation" terminates individuals' rights to file independent damage suits.
And in the past, the South Korean government has taken a similar view to Tokyo.
But, experts point to a different approach taken by Japan's Supreme Court.
"According to Japan's Supreme Court, individuals' rights are not terminated. They are alive but just unable to be realized through court trial."
Experts say this means the Japanese government or the company in question should compensate the victims out of respect for humanitarian principles.
Neither the Japanese nor South Korean government has heeded much attention to
the Japanese supreme court's remarks in their discussions over forced labor.
Shortly after the ruling, Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said Japan could potentially take the forced labor case to the International Court of Justice,... but a tribunal there can't convene without the consent of South Korea.
Choi Si-young, Arirang News.