"Tracking Down All 32.5 Billion Won": Hidden Assets of Collaborators' Descendants Under Intense Scrutiny

1. Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property Returns After 16-Year Hiatus

The Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property, which closed its doors in 2010, is set to resume operations this December, marking a return after 16 years.

The revised Special Act on the Reversion of Property of Pro-Japanese Anti-National Collaborators to the State will take effect on December 3. The government is currently making preparations with the goal of launching the second investigative commission alongside the law's enforcement.

This relaunch goes beyond simply reviving the previous committee. The updated legislation explicitly specifies that not only the pro-Japanese property itself, but also the proceeds obtained from disposing of such property, are subject to forfeiture to the state.

The first Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property operated for four years from July 2006 to July 2010. During this period, it decided to revert 2,359 parcels of land owned by 168 pro-Japanese collaborators to the state, an amount valued at approximately 237.3 billion won based on market prices at the time.

Regarding pro-Japanese property already transferred to third parties, the commission also issued determinations confirming pro-Japanese assets against 24 descendants of collaborators. However, after the commission was dissolved in 2010, the dedicated statutory body tasked with investigating new pro-Japanese assets ex officio and determining state forfeiture ceased to exist. Although the Ministry of Justice continued lawsuits and tracked certain assets based on records verified by the first commission, a significant void remained in systematic investigative operations.

Throughout this period, concerns were repeatedly raised that identifying and proving the assets and amounts subject to recovery had become increasingly challenging as properties were repeatedly inherited, sold, or transferred under different names.

2. Investigating Monetized Assets: The Core of the New Special Act

To address this institutional gap, the Special Act on the Reversion of Pro-Japanese Property was amended. The revision bill passed the plenary session of the National Assembly on May 7, was promulgated in June, and will take effect on December 3.

The centerpiece of the amendment is the explicit statutory provision that the proceeds received from disposing of pro-Japanese property are also subject to forfeiture to the state. This strengthens the institutional basis to investigate the circumstances of transactions and the proceeds obtained, and to pursue forfeiture proceedings even if descendants have already sold the land or buildings.

This does not imply that reclaiming sales proceeds was entirely impossible in the past. The state was previously able to file civil lawsuits, such as unjust enrichment claims under the Civil Act, demanding the return of sales proceeds from pro-Japanese property.

In fact, in April 2026, before the revised act took effect, the Ministry of Justice won a complete victory in a civil lawsuit claiming unjust enrichment of approximately 53 million won in sales proceeds from pro-Japanese property against a descendant of collaborator Im Seon-jun.

The significance of the new law lies in moving beyond the previous reliance on individual civil lawsuits, clearly establishing disposal proceeds from pro-Japanese property as targets of state forfeiture under the Special Act, and reinstating a dedicated statutory body to carry out investigations.

A monetary reward system will also be introduced to compensate individuals who report pro-Japanese property or provide crucial information essential to investigations.

Minister of Justice Jung Sung-ho stated on the occasion of the 81st National Liberation Day, "With the launch of the second Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property, we anticipate being able to reclaim at least 32.5 billion won or more in pro-Japanese assets."

The 32.5 billion won is not a finalized amount slated for recovery, but an estimated scale projected by the Ministry of Justice based on currently identified targets.

Pro-Japanese assets forfeited to the state will be prioritized for projects honoring patriots and independence activists, as well as stabilizing the livelihoods of their bereaved families. Specific methods of management and disposal will be determined in accordance with relevant statutes and administrative procedures.

3. Mountains to Climb Even with Strengthened Laws

Will the launch of the second investigative commission allow authorities to uncover and recover all pro-Japanese assets? Reality is not so simple.

Proving that a property was amassed as a reward for pro-Japanese collaboration requires examining century-old cadastral records, forest land registers, closed registry files, and historical inheritance and transaction documents. In cases where assets underwent multiple rounds of inheritance, sales, and title changes, tracing the trail of the property and its disposal proceeds becomes far more complex.

The rights of third parties who acquired property in good faith must also be protected. In addition, if descendants of collaborators conceal assets or disposal proceeds, investigative reach is inevitably constrained.

The second commission can request document submissions and witness statements, and apply to courts for provisional preservation orders on suspected assets. However, it does not possess compulsory investigative powers, such as search and seizure authority, akin to law enforcement agencies. Even when the commission issues a forfeiture decision, it is highly likely to face legal challenges through administrative or civil litigation if affected parties contest the ruling.

The relationship with past finalized court rulings is another critical consideration.

In an en banc ruling in December 2024, the Supreme Court held that there are legal limits to the state reasserting civil ownership under the revised act over specific properties where the commission's state forfeiture decision had already been overturned by a finalized administrative judgment.

However, this ruling does not prohibit reinvestigations of all past lost cases, nor does it categorically block the forfeiture of newly discovered pro-Japanese assets. Legal outcomes may differ depending on whether the asset in question is the identical property whose forfeiture revocation was finalized, or whether it constitutes newly uncovered property or separate disposal proceeds.

Consequently, it is difficult to conclude that the second commission will be able to recover all pro-Japanese assets. The commission's ultimate success is expected to hinge on how rigorously it proves newly discovered assets and disposal proceeds, and how precisely it navigates complex ownership structures alongside the boundaries of past judicial rulings.

4. 7.8 Billion Won from Lee Hae-seung, 53 Million Won from Im Seon-jun: Ongoing Recovery Lawsuits

Independent of preparations for the commission's launch, the Ministry of Justice is actively pursuing asset recovery lawsuits against the descendants of prominent pro-Japanese collaborators.

The Ministry of Justice filed an unjust enrichment lawsuit demanding the return of approximately 7.8 billion won obtained by descendants of collaborator Lee Hae-seung from selling 31 parcels of land in Howon-dong, Uijeongbu, Gyeonggi Province.

In a lawsuit seeking the return of approximately 53 million won in sales proceeds filed against descendants of Im Seon-jun, one of the "Seven Traitors of Jeongmi," a complete legal victory for the state was finalized in April 2026.

These cases illustrate that claiming the return of sales proceeds through civil lawsuits was possible even under the previous legal structure. At the same time, they highlight the limitations of relying solely on individual litigation to systematically discover new pro-Japanese assets and trace their disposal routes.

5. A New Litmus Test for South Korea's Transitional Justice

The recovery of pro-Japanese property is a notable transitional justice system through which the state legally investigates and reclaims economic benefits accumulated through colonial collaboration.

A defining feature is that this historical reckoning goes beyond establishing historical responsibility to tracing the ownership and transfer of unjustly amassed wealth. Globally, various asset recovery frameworks related to past injustices exist, such as the confiscation of property from Nazi collaborators, the restitution of Holocaust victim assets, and the reclamation of illicit wealth amassed by authoritarian regimes.

The true historical significance of South Korea's framework will ultimately be judged by the volume of assets the second commission uncovers, the fairness of its investigative process, and the final determinations of the courts.

6. Composed of 9 Members with Up to 5 Years of Operation

The second investigative commission will be composed of nine members, including one chairperson and two standing commissioners.

Its term of operation will be three years from the date the commission is formed, and it may be extended once for two years, allowing for a maximum operational period of five years.

On June 22, the Ministry of Justice inaugurated a preparatory task force for establishing the Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property, led by Prosecutor Lee Yeong-chang. The task force consists of 11 personnel dispatched from relevant government agencies, including the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs, and the Korea Forest Service.

Until the official launch of the commission, the preparatory task force will draft relevant regulations and establish comprehensive investigative plans and detailed procedural guidelines.

Moving forward, three key aspects warrant close attention. First, how concretely the investigative standards and evidentiary procedures are established to assess pro-Japanese property and disposal proceeds. Second, how authorities differentiate between identical properties whose forfeiture decisions were previously revoked in administrative litigation and newly discovered properties or proceeds. Third, whether the commission can connect its political and historical symbolism to tangible recovery results and procedural fairness.

The forfeiture of pro-Japanese property is not merely an exercise in re-judging the past.

It is a profound inquiry into how a society remembers and honors those who sacrificed for the nation, and the extent to which illicit economic gains forged through colonial collaboration can be rectified under today's laws and institutions.

The investigative commission, relaunching after 16 years, is now tasked with answering that question through thorough investigations and concrete legal achievements.


Deep Dive Q&A
Q1. What is the biggest difference between the first and second investigative commissions?

The most significant difference is that proceeds received from the disposal of pro-Japanese property are now explicitly defined as subject to state forfeiture under the Special Act. Previously, the state could only seek the return of sales proceeds through civil lawsuits, such as unjust enrichment claims. However, the revised law clearly designates disposal proceeds as targets for forfeiture, establishing both a statutory commission to investigate them and a reward system for whistleblowers. While the second commission can demand document submissions and statements, as well as apply for court preservation orders, it does not hold compulsory investigative powers like law enforcement agencies.

Q2. Can all property that has already been sold or transferred to third parties be recovered?

Not all properties can be reclaimed. Authorities must prove that the property was acquired as compensation for pro-Japanese collaboration and substantiate the flow of disposal proceeds. The legal rights of third parties who acquired property in good faith must also be protected, and tracking can be extremely difficult if proceeds have been transferred multiple times or concealed. Reasserting rights over identical properties whose forfeiture decisions were overturned and finalized in past administrative litigation may also face legal restrictions. However, this does not mean investigations into newly discovered assets or separate disposal proceeds are categorically barred.

Q3. How will the recovered pro-Japanese property and sales proceeds be utilized?

Pro-Japanese assets reverted to the state will be allocated primarily to programs honoring patriots and independence activists, as well as supporting the livelihoods and welfare of their bereaved families. Real estate may undergo management and disposal procedures, and specific utilization methods will be determined in accordance with relevant laws and administrative protocols.
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.