earticle

영어

After the liberation, North and South Korea both confiscated land from all the anti national actors to dissolute the unreasonable land relations of the Japanese colonization and to pay off faults of the past. However, the confiscating process of unified Korea may differ from that of the past depending on the method of unification. If one Korea is absorbed into the other, and the past confiscation of the absorbed Korea is considered illegal, as the case of Germany, the restoration of the land to the original owner can be regarded as a possible remedy. In such a case, though, common factors of confiscation found in both Koreas that took place after the liberation should not be called illegal. On the other hand, if the unification is agreed upon, the confiscation of North Korea will be evaluated as valid, and the recovery to the original owner will not be considered. In this case, new ways to reorganize land ownership should be established for balanced development of North Korea. However, if the confiscation of North Korea is considered illegal, as was in Germany, then there would be a problem on how to view the confiscation of South Korea. This is because two Koreas both confiscated land to resolve land-to-the-tillers principle and unreasonable land ownerships such as domination of land, and the subjects of confiscation included not only the land that was being cultivated by people other than the owner but also the ones cultivated by non-farmers. Therefore, there seems to be no reason to simply consider the confiscation of North Koreato be against the law of South Korea.