Report for the IALANA seminar
Choi BongtaeLawyer, South Korea

Current Status and Challenges of the Fight for Korean Atomic Bomb Victims' Rights

1. How Korean atomic bomb victims were formed.
By the atomic bombs dropped by the US forces on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 andNagasaki on August 9, 1945, people of Chosun, Koreans of that time, were victimized.
It has been estimated that the number of Korean Atomic Bomb Victims ("KABV") isapproximately 70,000, of which about 40,000 have died. The size of the KABV is morethan 10% of the total number of Japanese Habakusha, which is around 690,000, and thenumber of deaths of the KABV exceeds one sixth of the number of deaths of theJapanese, about 230,000.
Location

KABVDeaths

Survivorsin Koreain Japan

Hiroshima

50,00030,00020,00015,0005,000

Nagasaki

20,00010,00010,000

8,000

2,000

Total

70,00040,00030,00023,0007,000

Approximately 23,000 KABV returned to the Korean Peninsula. Although most of
the victims went back to the South Korea, around 2,000 went to the North Korea
because in 1948, the Republic of Korea was founded in the southern part of the 38thparallel and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in the northern part. In 1950, as
the Korean War broke out, the victims had to experience the devastating war, and eventhough an armistice agreement was reached in 1953, the truce continues to this date andthe Korea is still divided.
The KABV are the ones bearing the cross of the 20th century symbolized byimperialism and nuclear weapons. They are often referred to and recognized as theTriple Victims suffering from enforced mobilization, atomic bomb and neglection of thepublic. As of December 31, 2021, 1,992 people are registered as the members of theKorean Atomic Bomb Victims Association.
2. Grounds and direction of the fight for Korean atomic bomb victims' rights
Currently, the KABV have not received any apology or compensation from the U.S.
government for dropping the atomic bombs, or the Japanese government for provoking
the Japanese war. This issue of the South and North KABV should have been resolved
through the collaborative works of the South and North Koreas for an apology andcompensation from the U.S. and Japanese governments, but the two Koreas have been
divided. And in 1965, during the Cold War, the South Korean military regime
concluded a Korea-Japan Agreement on the Settlement of Claims with the Japaneseadministration that had no reflection on the war of aggression. The agreement was notfor the recovery of damages from the colonial ruling, but in the form of economic
cooperation as a by-product of inter-Korean ideology competition. This normalizationof relations between Korea and Japan without any compensation to the KABV made thevictims begin their fight for rights on a blank canvas. In other words, The fight for therights of the KABV started without knowing which government, Korean or Japanese,they should claim damages against.
The KABV's fight in Japan was mainly focused on the elimination of thediscriminatory nature of the Japan's Atomic Bomb Victims Relief Law. Their legal
rights struggle in Korea can be broadly categorized as a lawsuit against Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries for damages, a lawsuit for the disclosure of the documents of theKorea-Japan talks, a constitutional petition with the Constitutional Court of Korea, anda lawsuit against the U.S. government and related companies. Their struggle haschanged from the fight against Japanese company, through the Korean government, tothe U.S. government and companies. In other words, the struggle has evolved through 3phases, the Japanese company, the Korean government, and the U.S. government andcompanies.
3. The fight for KABV Rights in Korea
A. Litigation for damages against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

The atomic bomb victims of Hiroshima Mitsubishi Heavy Industries filed a lawsuit
against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. with Busan District Court in Korea on May 1,
2000 seeking an apology and the damages caused by forced mobilization, forced laborand failure to aid after the exposure to the radiation. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries argued
that the plaintiffs' claims were settled through the 1965 Korea-Japan Agreement on theSettlement of Claims and denied their legal obligations, which led the plaintiffs' to starta lawsuit for the disclosure of the related documents. Apart from the result of thedocument release lawsuit, on November 29, 2018, the Supreme Court of Korea reacheda final judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, granting damages against the defendantcompany.

B. Litigation against the Korean government for the disclosure of the documents related
to Korea-Japan settlement agreement
On October 11, 2002, the KABV, along with other victims of the Japanese empire,
filed an information disclosure suit with the Seoul Administrative Court, and on
February 13, 2004, the Seoul Administrative Court partially granted the claims. Whilean appeal by the Korean government was pending, some documents were released in2005. The complete disclosure revealed that nothing in the documents had any record
relating to the atomic bomb victims. As a result, the Civil-Government Joint Committeeannounced that serious human rights issues including atomic bomb victims rights werenot subject to the Korea-Japan settlement agreement and that the Japanese government
still has the legal obligations.
However, even after the announcement of this Civil-Government Joint Committee, theKorean government did not negotiate with the Japanese government for the relief of theKABV, and the Japanese government refused to take any legal responsibilities on theground of the Korea-Japan settlement agreement. This resulted in a dispute over theinterpretation of the Korea-Japan settlement agreement, whose resolution has been thereal pending issue.

C. Constitutional petition with the Constitutional Court of Korea

This constitutional petition was initiated in order to hold the Korean government
accountable because the Korean government's omission to act brought the interpretation
issue of the settlement agreement even after the announcement acknowledging that theKABV problem was not resolved through the 1965 Korea-Japan agreement and thepromise to make efforts to aid the victims with the Japanese government in the future,
which were the result of the Seoul Administrative Court's decision of the disclosurelawsuit brought by the KABV, along with other victims of the Japanese empire, inFebruary, 2004, and of the release of the documents relating to the Korea-Japansettlement agreement in January and August, 2005. On August 30, 2011, theConstitutional Court of Korea held that 'the Korean government's failure to resolve thedispute over the interpretation of the two governments as to whether the victims' rights
to claim compensations against Japan has been extinguished by Article 2(1) of theKorea-Japan settlement agreement by the procedure set forth in Article 3 of the KoreaJapan settlement agreement is unconstitutional because such omission violates theConstitution which declares the dignity and value of human persons, the right to pursue
happiness, and the State's obligation to guarantee basic human rights.'

D. Summary of the KABV's lawsuit against the U.S. government and corporations
On August 3, 2017, the Hiroshima victims of the atomic bombing on August 6, 1945
filed a mediation petition for damage claims against the U.S. government, three U.S.
companies, DuPont, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin, and the Korean government asrespondents. The change of venue to Seoul Central District Court was decided on
August 21, 2017, and there was one mediation session on September 18, 2017 without
service on the U.S. government and the companies. The mediation was not successful
and thus was converted into a civil lawsuit. On April 30, 2021, Seoul Central District
Court dismissed the case without prejudice on the grounds of the dismissal of thevictims' legal aid application, of the failure to deposit bond for the excessive amount oflitigation costs and of the international service issues.
Apart from the case, currently in the United States, a civil court case is in the process
to determine whether the use of atomic bomb is a violation of international law.

E. Establishment of the Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Support Act
Apart from these victims' individual lawsuits, the KABV tried to be remedied throughlegislation, and a law was successfully enacted in Korea.
In other words, the 'Special Act for Support for Korean Atomic Bomb Victims', which
aimed to understand and provide support to the Koreans who were exposed to theatomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan in 1945, was passed through a plenary
session of the National Assembly on May 19, 2016. Until then, as the living and healthconditions of the KABV were not known, the fact-finding investigations for suchconditions had been continuously requested.
The special act established the 'Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Support Committee' toinvestigate the actual conditions of the victims and to deliberate and decide on mattersnecessary to support them. The law also allowed the government to conduct
commemorative projects such as building memorial spaces and towers to comfort thevictims of the atomic bombing.
However, since only data collection, analysis, and report writing are specified for thefact-finding investigation, it is unclear whether the survey will include the quantitative
measure of actual damages Koreans have suffered from the atomic bombing, and thescale and size of the dead and the injured. Also, the issue of the descendants, including
the children, of the atomic bomb victims, is excluded in the Special Act. The children ofatomic bombing victims often suffer from disabilities and diseases as a result of theaftereffects of the atomic bombs and radiations. As there has not been any support
policy itself for the victims' children and descendants including basic medical aid, they
have been experiencing great difficulties in the cost of using medical institutions.
Although the children and the descendants of the atomic bombing victims are notexplicitly defined as the victims in the Act, the KABV are making efforts to ensure thatat least the investigation on their children and descendants are to be conducted.

4. About future tasks
The KABV, often called the Triple Victims, are currently neglected without receiving
proper remedies from the U.S., the Japanese, and the Korean governments, and areopening some ways for their rights through eliminating the discriminatory nature of theJapan's Atomic Bomb Victims Relief Law.
Even in Korea, although the National Assembly enacted a support law in 2016, aproper survey of the situation remains as a task for the future. For the relief and therights of KABV, agreeing to the fact that the two governments of Korea and Japan did
not negotiate on the atomic bombing damages in 1965 should be the start. If theJapanese government should intend to deny its legal responsibilities on the ground ofthe Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement, it should also be able to explain why remedies
are being made in Japan through the abolition of the discrimination of its Atomic Bomb
Victims Relief Law. Although it is already late, the governments should start to find theways of remedies for the KABV through the dispute settlement procedure in accordancewith Article 3 of the Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement and by accepting the decisionsof the courts of the two countries that a remedy for the KABV was never discussed atthe Korea-Japan Settlement Agreement and that compensations must be made to thevictims.
Currently, the mankind is facing a new challenge of the unprecedented corona virus.
This should be seen as an opportunity to resolve issues through solidarity andcooperation, and hopefully this should be an opportunity of advancing to the world
without nuclear weapons through the entry into effect of the Nuclear Weapon Ban
By having epidemiological investigations on the victims of the atomic bombing andmaking joint efforts to register them with the UNESCO, it will be widely known thatthe humankind and nuclear weapons cannot coexist. The irresponsibility of thesuperpowers with nuclear weapons are to be condemned, and it is necessary to jointly
push the ratification of the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty.