일본의 실효 지배의 검증
상설 중재 재판소 Eritrea-Yemen Arbitration의 판례를 참고로 해 검증
http://www.pca-cpa.org/ENGLISH/RPC/EY/ch7ER-YE.htm
Fishing Activities by Private Persons
For state activity capable of establishing a claim for sovereignty, the Tribunal must look to the state licensing and enforcement activities concerning fishing described above.
주권 행사를 입증하는 국가의 활동으로서 재판소는 어업 허가 및 어업에 관련하는 집행 활동에 주목해야 한다.
＜해당하는 일본의 실효지배의 증거＞
1905년 4월 14일：강치고기잡이를 허가제로 하는 어업 단속 규칙 개정(시마네현령 18호)
- 1905년 5월 20일：상기의 어업 단속 규칙에 의한 강치고기잡이의 허가(을농 제 805호)
Activities on the Islands
In order to examine the performance of jurisdictional acts on the Islands, the Tribunal must consider evidence of activities on the land territory of the Islands as well as acts in the water surrounding the Islands. This evidence includes: landing parties on the Islands; the establishment of military posts on the Islands; the construction and maintenance of facilities on the Islands; the licensing of activities on the land of the Islands; the exercise of criminal or civil jurisdiction in respect of happenings on the Islands; the construction or maintenance of lighthouses; the granting of oil concessions; and limited life and settlement on the Islands.
주변 해역과 같게, 섬에서의 관할권에 관한 행동의 증거를 검증해야 한다.예：상륙 기록, 시설의 건설·유지 관리등.
＜해당하는 일본의 실효 지배의 증거＞
1905년 5월 3일：지사에 의한 측량 명령(시마네현지 제 90호) 및 시마 츠카사에 의한 실측 보고
1905년 8월 19일：시마네현 지사에 의한 타케시마 시찰(산그늘 신문에 게재 있어)
1905년 8월：콘크리트 기반 목조의 해군 가설망루의 건설(사세보 진수부 사령장관으로부터 시마네현 지사에의 단속해 요청)
1906년 3월 27일：지사생명에 의한 시마네현 공무원의 시찰
- 어업 오두막의 이용과 유지
일본 외무성
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/takeshima/
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/index-k.html
한국이 주장하는 실효 지배의 검증
국제사법재판소 Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan 섬의 판례를 참고로 해 검증
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf
국제사법재판소 Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan 섬의 판례를 참고로 해 검증
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf
＜주장 1：현재, 한국은 타케시마를 실효 지배하고 있다＞
The Court further states that “at the time when these activities werecarried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest”.
타국에 의한 비동의나 강의의 표명이 있는 실효 지배는 권원(법적 근거)이 되지 않는다.일본이 항의하고 있어, 현재의 한국의 점유는 무효.
＜주장 2：안용복이 에도시대에 타케시마는 한국령이라고 선언했다＞
Finally, Indonesia states that the waters around Ligitan and Sipadan have traditionally been used by Indonesian fishermen. The Court observes, however, that activities by private persons cannot be seen as effectivités if they do not take place on the basis of official regulations or under governmental authority.
개인의 활동은 실효 지배로 간주해지지 않다.안용복은 「개인」이며, 실효 지배의 증거가 되지 않는다.
＜주장 3：1899년 칙령 41호로 선언했다＞
The Court finally observes that it can only consider those acts as constituting a relevant display of authority which leave no doubt as to their specific reference to the islands in dispute as such. Regulations or administrative acts of a general nature can therefore be taken as effectivite"s ···
혐의가 없는 명확한 표시가 필요.칙령의 「이시지마」는, 어디의 섬이나 불명.
＜주장 A：독도의 기재가 있는 고지도가 많이 있다＞
①「우야마시마=독도」설
이 주장은 전혀 신빙성은 없고, 지도상의죽서를 의도적으로 독도이라고 왜곡하려고 하는 것이다.
이하, 참조되었으니까
/jp/exchange/theme/read.php?uid=10031&fid=10031&thread=1000000&idx=1&page=1&tname=exc_board_11&number=3&f=name&word=%E3%81%82%E3%81%86%E3%81%90%E3%81%99
/kr/exchange/theme/read.php?uid=10031&fid=10031&thread=1000000&idx=1&page=1&tname=exc_board_11&number=3&f=name&word=%E3%81%82%E3%81%86%E3%81%90%E3%81%99
②「이시마=독도」설
결론；1905년 이전에 한국, 조선 왕조가 타케시마/독도를 영유 하고 있던근거 없음.
청조의 여러분！
잘못해, 혹은새로운 주장이 있으면 아무쪼록
없으면,세뇌로부터 깨세요！
独島or竹島？
常設仲裁裁判所 Eritrea-Yemen Arbitrationの判例を参考にして検証
http://www.pca-cpa.org/ENGLISH/RPC/EY/ch7ER-YE.htm
Fishing Activities by Private Persons
For state activity capable of establishing a claim for sovereignty, the Tribunal must look to the state licensing and enforcement activities concerning fishing described above.
主権行使を立証する国家の活動として、裁判所は漁業許可及び漁業に関連する執行活動に着目しなければならない。
＜該当する日本の実効支配の証拠＞
Activities on the Islands
In order to examine the performance of jurisdictional acts on the Islands, the Tribunal must consider evidence of activities on the land territory of the Islands as well as acts in the water surrounding the Islands. This evidence includes: landing parties on the Islands; the establishment of military posts on the Islands; the construction and maintenance of facilities on the Islands; the licensing of activities on the land of the Islands; the exercise of criminal or civil jurisdiction in respect of happenings on the Islands; the construction or maintenance of lighthouses; the granting of oil concessions; and limited life and settlement on the Islands.
周辺海域と同様に、島での管轄権に関する行動の証拠を検証しなければならない。例：上陸記録、施設の建設・維持管理等。
＜該当する日本の実効支配の証拠＞
＜主張１：現在、韓国は竹島を実効支配している＞
The Court further states that "at the time when these activities werecarried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest".
他国による不同意や講義の表明がある実効支配は権原（法的根拠）とならない。日本が抗議しており、現在の韓国の占有は無効。
＜主張２：安龍福が江戸時代に竹島は韓国領と宣言した＞
Finally, Indonesia states that the waters around Ligitan and Sipadan have traditionally been used by Indonesian fishermen. The Court observes, however, that activities by private persons cannot be seen as effectivités if they do not take place on the basis of official regulations or under governmental authority.
個人の活動は実効支配とみなされない。安龍福は「個人」であり、実効支配の証拠にならない。
＜主張３：1899年勅令41号で宣言した＞
The Court finally observes that it can only consider those acts as constituting a relevant display of authority which leave no doubt as to their specific reference to the islands in dispute as such. Regulations or administrative acts of a general nature can therefore be taken as effectivite"s ・・・
疑いのない明確な表示が必要。勅令の「石島」は、どこの島か不明。
＜主張A：独島の記載がある古地図がたくさんある＞
日本の実効支配の検証
常設仲裁裁判所 Eritrea-Yemen Arbitrationの判例を参考にして検証
http://www.pca-cpa.org/ENGLISH/RPC/EY/ch7ER-YE.htm
Fishing Activities by Private Persons
For state activity capable of establishing a claim for sovereignty, the Tribunal must look to the state licensing and enforcement activities concerning fishing described above.
主権行使を立証する国家の活動として、裁判所は漁業許可及び漁業に関連する執行活動に着目しなければならない。
＜該当する日本の実効支配の証拠＞
- 1905年4月14日：海驢漁を許可制にする漁業取締規則改正（島根県令18号）
- 1905年5月20日：上記の漁業取り締まり規則による海驢漁の許可（乙農第805号）
Activities on the Islands
In order to examine the performance of jurisdictional acts on the Islands, the Tribunal must consider evidence of activities on the land territory of the Islands as well as acts in the water surrounding the Islands. This evidence includes: landing parties on the Islands; the establishment of military posts on the Islands; the construction and maintenance of facilities on the Islands; the licensing of activities on the land of the Islands; the exercise of criminal or civil jurisdiction in respect of happenings on the Islands; the construction or maintenance of lighthouses; the granting of oil concessions; and limited life and settlement on the Islands.
周辺海域と同様に、島での管轄権に関する行動の証拠を検証しなければならない。例：上陸記録、施設の建設・維持管理等。
＜該当する日本の実効支配の証拠＞
- 1905年5月3日：知事による測量命令（島根県地第90号）及び島司による実測報告
- 1905年8月19日：島根県知事による竹島視察（山陰新聞に掲載あり）
- 1905年8月：コンクリート基盤木造の海軍仮設望楼の建設（佐世保鎮守府司令長官から島根県知事への取り締まり要請）
- 1906年3月27日：知事命による島根県役人の視察
- 漁業小屋の利用と維持
日本外務省
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/takeshima/
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/index-k.html
韓国の主張する実効支配の検証
国際司法裁判所 Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan 島の判例を参考にして検証
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf
国際司法裁判所 Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan 島の判例を参考にして検証
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf
＜主張１：現在、韓国は竹島を実効支配している＞
The Court further states that "at the time when these activities werecarried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest".
他国による不同意や講義の表明がある実効支配は権原（法的根拠）とならない。日本が抗議しており、現在の韓国の占有は無効。
＜主張２：安龍福が江戸時代に竹島は韓国領と宣言した＞
Finally, Indonesia states that the waters around Ligitan and Sipadan have traditionally been used by Indonesian fishermen. The Court observes, however, that activities by private persons cannot be seen as effectivités if they do not take place on the basis of official regulations or under governmental authority.
個人の活動は実効支配とみなされない。安龍福は「個人」であり、実効支配の証拠にならない。
＜主張３：1899年勅令41号で宣言した＞
The Court finally observes that it can only consider those acts as constituting a relevant display of authority which leave no doubt as to their specific reference to the islands in dispute as such. Regulations or administrative acts of a general nature can therefore be taken as effectivite"s ・・・
疑いのない明確な表示が必要。勅令の「石島」は、どこの島か不明。
＜主張A：独島の記載がある古地図がたくさんある＞
①「于山島＝独島」説
この主張は全く信憑性はなく、地図上の竹嶼を意図的に独島であると歪曲しようとするものである。
以下、参照されたし
②「石島＝独島」説
結論；1905年以前に韓国、朝鮮王朝が竹島/独島を領有していた根拠なし。
青組の皆さん！
間違い、もしくは新たな主張があればどうぞ
なければ、洗脳から覚めなさい！