최근에 친일행위자의 재산을 국가로 귀속시키는 법률이 제정되었지만, 다양한 이유로 국가귀속이 되지 않고 있다. 특히 친일행위자의 후손들은 조선시대에 조성된 분묘 주위의 임야는 당시의 군주로부터 하사받은 조상소유의 부동산이므로, 일제강점기에 친일대가로 취득한 것이 아니라고 주장하고 있다. 그런데 그러한 주장은 부당하다고 생각한다. 왜냐하면 조선시대에는 개인이 산림을 배타적으로 점유할 수 없는 사점금지의 원칙을 법규범에 의해서 확고하게 정립시키고 있었기 때문이다. 조선시대의 법규범에 의하면, 당시의 임야소유권은 주권자인 군주 또는 군주로 대표되는 국가에 귀속하고 있었고, 개인은 분묘설치의 경우에 한하여 임야를 제한적으로 이용할 수 있을 뿐이었던 것이다. 이러한 조선시대의 국유산림은 일제강점기에 근대법이 이식되면서 일제정권에 의해서 개인의 사적소유권의 객체로서 전환되었다고 볼 수 있다.A Special Law about the Property Reversion of Anti National Actors
under the Rule of Japanese Imperialism lately was passed in the National
Assembly on 29, Dec. 2005. The apparatus of the nation were composed by
the law. The government body is going to investigate the Property of Anti
National Actors under the Rule of Japanese Imperialism. And if it is proven
that ownership was acquired unfairly, it will be take them back to the State.
Of course, Somebody who has a complaint can institute administrative
judgment or administrative litigation. The government body published an
interim announcement recently that the descendant of Anti National Actors
instituted administrative judgment. The point of the claim was the existence
of ancestorial graves. I think that the claim of the descendant of Anti
National Actors is unreasonable. Because the Chosun Dynasty(Yi dynasty)
was stipulated in its law prohibition of exclusive private property right to
woodland(sajomkeumji 私占禁地), which means all the woodland belongs to
the nation or the king as a sovereign by law. However, the woodland of
State Ownership was converted as an object of private ownership by
Japanese Imperialism Government under Japanese Colonization. Then, what
the descendants of pro-Japanese collaborators are arguing is unfounded,
namely the argument that their title of the property was passed onto them
during Japanese colonial rule sustaining the same identity. Therefore, it is
necessary to separate the discussion of the fact that the precedent grave
existed and the question of the price.