Below is a translation of The 9th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao
"Criticism on Dokdo Research Center”
In April 16, Dokdo Research Center under the Korea Maritime Institute(韓国海洋水産開発院) has released a document entitled “Does Dokdo Really Belong to Japan? - Refutation against the Japanese MOFA's claims." ("The Analysis of the Pending Problem of the Maritime Fishery") This refutation itself, however, turned out to be the valuable evidence that Korean themselves proved "Dokdo" was not Korean territory. Because, in the last part of the document, the Dokdo Research Center said, “Japan’s move is tantamount to denying Korea’s complete liberation and independence and justifying its colonialist acts.”, and this comment in fact is the biggest fabrication of all.
Japanese territories such as Kuril Islands, South Karafuto(Sakhalin) and Northern Territories were deprived by the Soviet Union, and Takeshima by South Korea after the end of World War II. In 1952, South Korea drew illegal "Lee Sung-man Line" and nearly 3,000 innocent Japanese fishermen were seized and detained. South Korea used those civilian hostages as a diplomatic card for achieving relinquishment of the Japanese property claim in Korea and legal status of the Korean residents in Japan forcefully admitted from Japan in the process of normalization talks between two parties. Those historical facts are literally concealed in Korea and every time Takeshima issue comes up, Korean brings up "colonial rule before WWII" and try to justify their own act of territorial aggression against Japan. On the contrary, Korea's territorial ambition doesn't stop in Takeshima, but even go further for Japanese historical sovereign island Tsushima(対馬) and northeastern part of China(間島 : Koryo history issue). “Northeast Asian History Foundation" had lead this territorial aggression in the former President Noh's era and this time, "Korea Maritime Institute" took over the role in the new administration.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan made a issue of the fact that Korea has no historic title nor original title for Takeshima/Dokdo. They pointed out the notation(分註) "Yojiji says that Ulleun and Usan are all Usanguk. Usan is so-called Japanese Matsushima (輿地志云 鬱陵 于山 皆于山國地 于山則倭所謂松島也 )" from "Dongguk Munheon Bigo Yojigo(東国文献備考・與地考)"(1770) which quoted "Dongguk Yojiji(東国輿地志)" by Ryu Hyung-won(柳馨遠). (See here.) Korean has been used this notation as a basis for their claim that Usando is Takeshima/Dokdo and is a part of Ulleundo. However, the sentences in original document, which were found recently, turned out in fact, to actually be stating "It is said that Usan and Ulleung were originally one island (一説干山 鬱陵 本一島)", thus Korean logic has completely collapsed.
Dokdo Research Center refuted that Usando and Ulleundo are considered to be different islands in "Dongguk Yojiji". However, that is a makeshift for covering up the collapse of the basis for their claim that Takeshima/Dokdo is Usando and it is Ulleundo's adjacent island. The real point is the fact that the compiler of "Dongguk Munheon Bigo Yojigo" quoted only one sentence "It is said that Usan and Ulleung were originally one island(一説干山 鬱陵 本一島)" from Yojiji and inserted "Usando is so-called Japanese Matsushima(于山則倭所謂松島也)" to alter the text. Then why do Korean persist in this apparently fabricated notation?
The reason is, this altered part of notation was based on the testimony by Ahn Young-bok(安龍福 ). Pak(朴錫昌) annotated this as "so-called Usando(所謂于山島)" on the map "欝陵島図形" in 1711, and 鄭尚驥, 金正浩 and others all followed this labelling and made the island Usando. Thus, Korean side has been claiming this island as today's Dokdo. However, "so-called Usando" is not Takeshima/Dokdo in the first place. The "so-called Usando" is Jukdo(竹島 in Korean, 竹嶼 in Japanese) which Kitazawa Masanari (北沢正誠) identified as "Takeshima(竹島)" in his book "A Study of Historical Evidence of Takeshima (竹島考証)(1881) and Lee Gyu-won labelled as "竹島". In other words, Takeshima/Dokdo was put outside of Choson (Korean) territory.
Against all those negative facts, Korean still claims "Seokdo(石島)" in Korean Imperial Ordinance No.41 in 1900 as Takeshima/Dokdo without any reliable basis. The name "Dokdo" was started to be used by Korean residents on Ulleundo who were hired by Japanese to go hunting on today's Takeshima around 1904. Before that, it was called as Japanese name "Ryanko (Yanko) = Liancourt". The name "独島" that was just started to be called in 1904 cannot be the root of the name of the island which was defined as "石島" in 1900. Dokdo Research Center apparently shot their own foot, since "Ryanko-to" was placed outside of Korean territory even at the point of 1900.
Naming "Ryanko-to" as "Takeshima" and incorporating the island which there were no trace of occupied by other countries(無主の地), into Japanese territory is absolutely no aggression at all. However, the Korean government's activity of keeping illegal invade and occupation of Takeshima, the Japanese territory, since 1954 is the one which should be called as "a territorial aggression", apparently.
“実事求是 〜日韓のトゲ、竹島問題を考える〜 第9回 韓国独島研究センター批判 下條正男”
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.
Other Column of the Series:
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
The 21st column " Refutation against "Analysis of Shimojo Masao's Editorials" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)”
The 8th column “The Historical Facts" The 6th column “Onshu-shicho-goki (隠州視聴合記)" and the "Nihon Yochi Totei Zenzu (日本輿地路程全図)" by Nagakubo Sekisui(長久保赤水)"
The 5th column “South Korea’s erroneous interpretation of the document 'Takeshima and Another Island are Unrelated to Japan"
The 4th column “Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."