을사조약의 법적 효력에 관한 연구

Abstract

Japan's colonization in Korea was practically founded by what is called the Convention between Japan and Korea of 1905. Imperialism was current and international law was devoted to imperialism in those days. But it does not mean that every colonization was lawful by its very nature. A colonization was lawful only if it was taken a necessary procedure required by international law at the time. This is not the matter of the historical feelings, such as whether or not it was aggression or whether it was a violation or a favor. Even these days Korea and Japan one another express different opinions about the validity of the treaties concluded between the two states at the time. Korea has insisted that the Convention is null and void from the origin because it did not complete the requirement for the formation of a treaty for the absence of ratification of King Gojong of Korea, who had treaty-making powers, to the Convention and the expression of Korea's consent to the Convention was procured by the coercion of her representatives through acts and threats directed against them. But Japan has insisted that, somehow or other, the fact that the Convention of 1905 was accepted in international society shows that it was lawful. Japan's stand that the Convention was lawful because it was accepted in international society at the time is inadequate. The statement about the fact that it was accepted in international society at the time may be proper on the base of political approach. But, on the base of legal approach, it was not lawful as Korea indicates above.