공람
1958년 10월 27일
차관
국장

Tokyo, October 23, 1958

No.28
Dear Mr. President:
As I reported by cable Nos. MTB-019 of October 18, MTB-020 of October 20, MTB-022 of October 20, MTB-025 of October 22, and MTB-026 of October 22, respectively, the 3rd meeting of the Committee on Fisheries and "Peace Line", the 4th meeting of the Sub-committee on Other Claims Regarding the Matter an Art Objects, the 9th meeting of the Committee on Legal Status of Korean Residents in Japan, the 16th meeting of the Sub-committee on Vessels, and the 4th meeting of the Committee on Fisheries and "Peace Line" were held at the Japanese Foreign Ministry, respectively, as follows:
The 3rd meeting of the Committee on Fisheries and "Peace Line" ---------3:00p.m., Oct.17,1958
The 4th meeting of the Sub-committee on Other Claims Regarding the Matter on Art Objects ---10:30a.m., Oct.18,1958
The 9th meeting of the Committee on Legal Status of Korean Residents in Japan ------ 3:00p.m., Oct, 20, 1958
The 16th meeting of the Sub-committee on Vessels ----------------3:00p.m., Oct, 21, 1958
The 4th meeting of the Committee on Fisheries and Peace Line"--------- 11:00a.m., Oct.22, 1958
I. The Committee on Fisheries and "Peace Line"
At the 3rd meeting of this committee, our delegation stated that the Japanese proposal on "the Essentials of Japan-Korea Fishery Agreement"
His Excellency
Dr. Syngman Rhee
President of the Republic of Korea presented at the previous meeting could not be considered as a basis for discussions on the ground that it is extremely unconstructive, particularly in view of the Item One of the proposal. At this stage, the Japanese side asked us if the Korean sids would submit a proposal in this regard.
Our side told the Japanese side that the Korean proposal regarding the essentials of Korea-Japan Fishery Agreement based on the Peace Line, submitted at the 2nd Korea-Japan Conference in 1953, is standing as our position.
Our delegation requested the Japanese side to submit a new constructive proposal on fisheries, it any. The Japanese side said it would study on the matter and express its views at the 4th meeting. However, at the 4th meeting held on Wednesday, October 22, the Japanese side stated that it had not completed the preparation to present its views and requested us to wait until next meeting which is scheduled on October 22, 1958.
II. The Sub-committee on Other Claims Regarding the matter on Art Objects: The Japanese side said that it considered very difficult to give its answer to our request made at previous meetings, pending basic decision regarding the matter by the higher levels of the Government of Japan, due to the complicated situations of internal politics, but it added that the Japanese sids will make effort to iron out difficulties with sincerity.
It continued that the answer would be made as soon as possible. Regretting that the Japanese answer was being so delayed, our side strongly requested that the Japanese side give a definite answer to our request at the earliest possible date.
III. The Committee on Legal Status of Korean Residents in Japan: i) In accordance with Item One of Annex II of the Government Instructions No.OIJONG 3554 of September 18, 1958, our side presented to the committee our proposal regarding status and treatment of Korean residents as attached to the Government Instructions No.OIJONG 3810 of October 13, 1958. In this connection, we put on record the reservations as set forth in the Government cable instructions No.FTB-009. The Japanese side said it would study the Korean proposal and express its views on it at the next meeting.
ii) Our side requested the Japanese side to provide us with a name list of the 37 Korean parolees to whom Mr. KATSUHO referred at the previous meeting.
We will make a prompt report when we hear from the Japanese side about its views on our proposal.
IV. The Sub-Committee on Vessels:
Referring to the request we made at the previous meeting, our side asked the Japanese whether they are ready to submit to us the list of vessels falling under the category of Agenda item A. In this connection, the Japanese side said that it had already submitted a list of vessels at the previous Korea-Japan Conference.
Our side explained that we expected the submittance by the Japanese side of a new list which would cover all the vessels belonging to the category of Agenda item A, since the previous list was too short of our satisfaction in terms of number, etc.
The Japanese side attempted to start the legal arguement regarding the basis of our claims concerning Agenda item A. Countering the Japanese remarks in this regard, our side repeated its request for the submittance of the list under reference. The Japanese side said it would express its view further on the problem under Agenda item A at the next meeting.
With the sentiment of loyalty and esteem, I remain,

Most respectfully,
Ben C. Limb