한ㆍ중 간도영유권문제와 국제법상의 시효문제

The Territorial Dispute over Gando(間島) between Korea and China and Prescription in International Law

China’s present possession over Gando(間島) is not lawful because of the invalidity of the so-called 1909 Gando Agreement which China considers as the ground for her lawful sovereignty over it. But the government of Korea have not yet protest against China, even after the establishment of diplomatic relationship with China in 1992. Prescription in International Law as a reason for the acquisition of a territory has no positive rule. However, the majority of writers on International Law recognize the necessity of prescription in international law as well as municipal law and the decisions of international tribunals quoted prescription to judge the sovereignty of the territory concerned. Hence therefore Korean Government should protest unlawful possession over Gando to China as soon as possible to discontinue prescription. There is no rule established about the duration for completion of prescription in international law. It differs cases by case. But in the case of Gando between Korea and China, the point of time to start the duration for completion of prescription, together with the length of time, calls special attention. After Gando Agreement of 1909 between Japan and China, Korea had annexed to Japan in 1910 and achieved independence from Japan in 1945, established sovereign state in 1948 but she had not diplomatic relationship with China until 1992. Therefore even though China’s possession over Gando started from 1909, the absence of Korea’s protest against it should be counted from 1992. Korean Government, anyway, is urged to protest to China.