Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
| Yang Geum-deok, one of the five plaintiffs in the wartime forced labor compensation suit that won against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries last November, talks to reporters during a press conference at Gwangju City Council, Tuesday. Yonhap |
By Lee Suh-yoon
Plaintiffs who won a compensation suit against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for its wartime forced labor filed a formal request to a local court Tuesday to seize and liquidate the Japanese firm's assets in Korea, after the company refused to abide by a November Supreme Court ruling in their favor.
The request came amid an escalating feud between the two countries following the court verdict and Japan's alleged retaliatory move restricting exports of key materials to Korea.
The action comes eight months after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling, which sided with 87-year-old Yang Geum-deok and four other plaintiffs who were forced to work without pay at a Mitsubishi aircraft plant in Nagoya during World War II. The court ordered Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to pay between 100 million won ($85,000) and 150 million won to each victim in legal compensation.
But the company refused to pay, and also ignored multiple requests to negotiate an agreement, according to the plaintiffs' lawyers. During this time, three plaintiffs passed away.
"There is a limit to waiting," civic groups that supported the five said in a press conference on behalf of the plaintiffs, Tuesday. "As we warned, we have asked the court to order the sale of Mitsubishi Heavy Industry's assets in Korea."
The request was filed with Daejeon District Court, targeting the "liquidation of six patents and two trademark rights" which the company was granted in Korea, including its new MHI English logo. Earlier in March, they asked a court to allow them to "seize the intellectual properties," a request that was accepted.
The groups also condemned the Japanese government for pressuring firms to refuse the Supreme Court's order to deflect Japan's legal responsibility for war crimes, and its economic retaliation this month in response to the ruling.
Following the plaintiffs' request, the court will first ask for a submission from Mitsubishi before preparing to auction the assets. In anticipation of such steps, Taro Kono, Japan's foreign affairs minister, warned last week that any harm caused to Japanese firms will be met with "necessary measures." The Japanese government claims all compensation issues linked to its 1910-45 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula were permanently settled under the 1965 Treaty on Basic Relations.
Yang, the surviving plaintiff, was present at the press conference.
"The company said they would hold onto our wages for safekeeping and send them to us later. But there has been no news of it ever since," she said. "I want to resolve this injustice before I die. Japan must act according to its conscience."
Nippon Steel and Nachi-Fujikoshi have also faced similar asset seizures in Korea recently for refusing court orders in separate forced labor compensation suits. The plaintiffs in these two cases filed for the sale of the companies' assets in May but have not received court approval yet due to procedural delays.
