REPUBLIC OF KOREAN MISSION IN JAPAN

TOKYO, August 23, 1956.

No.41
Excellency:
I met Director Nakagawa of the Japanese Foreign Ministry Asian Bureau, last Mondav and he told me that his Government was desirous of settling the Omura detainee issue. He asked me if it was possible for our side to merely say that we would discuss the deportation problem at the formal Korea-Japan Conference, saying that the Justice Ministry was concerned about this case, because to carry out the Shigemitsu commitment (on April 2, this year) might make a precedent in the future.
I replied to him that the Japanese Government had not withdrawn the property claims yet which was the prerequisite to the resumption of the talks and that it was quite meaningless to say such a thing when it wasn't even known when the talks would be resumed.
Nakagawa then told me that his Government had no intention to make the said property claims, only it was afraid that the problem of compensating those Japanese concerned, would arise, in case the withdrawal of the property claims was made public. He continued, the Japanese Planning Board in fact was now calculating the total amount of such compensation.
I said that the San Francisco peace treaty clearly provided that Japan renounce her property rights in Korea and that the matter of compensation was not a subject for an international conference.
At this point Nakagawa said that some time ago the problem concerning the property claims was discussed between Ambassador Allison and Japanese Government leaders. Amb. Allison, according to him, said that Japan should renounce the property claims to Korea and they were further discussing on the wording of the withdrawal statement to be published.
It appears that the Japanese Government is going to accept the State Department note pertaining to this problem sent to our Embassy in Washington early in 1952 and act in accordance with the spirit contained in the said note, according to Nakagawa. (as Your Excellency is aware, the US State Department in 1952 made clear in a note to our Washington Embassy that Japan had no claims at all in Korea) Mr. Nakagawa further said that if the Japanese Government publicly announce it, it would amount to withdrawing the property claims.
Throughout the entire conversation I made no commitment at all, only asking him if Japan still was considering the above-mentioned formula, to which Nakagawa replied in the affirmative.
It is evident that the Japanese side is interested in settling the detainee issue before the resumption of the formal Korea-Japan Conference, in order to seek the release of Japanese fishermen now in Pusan. I believe that if we press the Japanese side, they might resume the talks with us after withdrawing the property claims. In that case, we can just attempt settlement of our oroperty claims to Japan, while avoiding discussion of other matters. In this manner, we can prevent the entry of Japanese into our land. I carefully avoided making any commitment in this regard, however, from strategical standpoint of dealing with them and also in view of the fact that there are no instructions in this regard from the Government.
Regarding the travel to North Korea of 48 Korean we were successful so far in preventing their departure from Japan. I met General Lemnitzer and Ambassador Allison to seek their assistance in our effort to stop their departure. Both of them were quite cooperative and assured us that they would do all they can to comply with our request.
As for the travel documents issued to them by the International Committee of Red Cross, I received a cable from the Foreign Ministry, containing our memorandum sent to the ICRC in reply to its note of July 24.
It would be desirable for our Charge d'Affaires in Paris to continue to approach the ICRC Secretariat and press for the withdrawal of the travel certificates. Of course, I will continue to do everything possible to accomplish our objective, at this end.
With sentiments of loyalty and esteem, I remain,
Most respectfully,
/S/ Yong Shik Kim