Based on a December 3 Sankei Shimbun article, this essay presents the final testimony of a Korean-American who lived under Japanese colonial rule. It examines the misunderstood reality of the Sōshi Kaimei system, the enduring influence of Confucian clan-based society, and Japan’s role in establishing modern law and public order in Korea. Through firsthand testimony, the article challenges prevailing historical distortions and highlights forgotten aspects of modernization.

The “Will” of a Korean-American

I would like to continue writing, as I did in my previous column (dated November 19), about Mr. L, a Korean-American who passed away this March in his mid-nineties.
Born under Japanese rule in Korea, and a middle school student in his mid-teens at the time of the war’s end, Mr. L was truly a “living witness” who experienced the realities of Japanese rule firsthand.
He had also heard in detail about conditions during the period of rule from his grandfather and father, both intellectuals.
Eighty years after the war, a vicious cycle continues in which people who did not experience that era spread “things that are not true,” repeatedly “overwrite” history, and allow distortions to take root.

As I wrote previously, Mr. L was by no means uniformly “pro-Japanese”; rather, he maintained a balanced, fair evaluation of Japanese rule.
His testimony, I believe, served as a stern rebuke to modern Japanese who have “given up” and “left unexamined” this issue.

Treated the Same as the Japanese

Among the many misunderstood topics Mr. L raised was the system of Sōshi Kaimei (“name creation and name change”), implemented in 1940.
This system is still widely and notoriously described as one that “forcibly confiscated ancestral family names,” yet its actual operation is surprisingly little known.

In reality, the Korean family name (sei, indicating clan lineage) and bon-gwan (ancestral place of origin) remained on official registers, while a new Japanese-style shi (family name) such as Yamada or Tanaka could be newly created.
If no application for a new shi was submitted during the designated period, the original sei automatically became the shi.

Even prominent figures such as Choi Seung-hee, the world-famous dancer, and Hong Sa-ik, the highest-ranking Korean lieutenant general in the Imperial Japanese Army, did not adopt Japanese-style family names.
Though they held special positions, their cases demonstrate that the original Korean surname could be retained as the legal family name.
Name changes, moreover, were voluntary procedures requiring a processing fee.

The background to the implementation of this system was Japan’s attempt, under wartime conditions following the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War in 1937, to advance assimilation under the slogan of “Japan and Korea as one body” by transforming traditional bloodline-centered Korean society into a Japanese-style family system.
At the same time, there were voices within Japan that opposed the policy on public-security grounds.

How was this policy received among Koreans? Naturally, it was not universally welcomed.
For elite families that took pride in ancestral lineage under Confucian traditions, it may well have been regarded as unwelcome interference.
Mr. L stated:
“Some people showed strong resistance, but I believe they made up only about 20 percent. Traditional Korean names, often consisting of three Chinese characters, were themselves modeled on Chinese customs. Among Koreans who moved to Manchuria, many hoped to be treated the same as Japanese and expected discrimination to disappear.”

Regarding the issue of “coercion,” while there may be arguments that authorities in practice strongly pressured people to adopt Japanese-style family names, it should also be recognized—based on these circumstances—that there were voices who genuinely wished for the policy to be implemented.
Ultimately, approximately 80 percent of Koreans adopted new Japanese-style family names.
Mr. L, who was an elementary school student at the time, recalled that his own family accepted the change quite naturally.

The “Dark Side” of Confucianism

Mr. L frequently pointed out that before the Japan–Korea Annexation in 1910, the Korean Peninsula was plagued by political infighting among ruling elites and social disorder—conditions attributable in no small part to the “dark side” of Confucian ideology.
Throughout the approximately 500 years of the Yi Dynasty, Confucianism functioned virtually as a state religion.
Private interests of the clan were placed above the public good; scholar-bureaucrats were exalted to the highest status, while military power, commerce, and technology were despised.
Excessive clan domination fostered factionalism and corruption, leaving the masses to suffer exploitation and oppression.
As a result, military, technological, and economic strength failed to develop, and Korea became a “hunting ground” for the great powers in the modern era.
From this perspective, Korea’s modernization can also be seen as a process of breaking free from the “curse of Confucianism.”

This curse did not disappear easily even under Japanese rule.
At Keijō Imperial University, Korean students overwhelmingly favored the law faculty, and even knowing the path was narrow, they aspired to become elite bureaucrats—just as in the Yi Dynasty era.
By contrast, at Taihoku Imperial University in Taiwan, many students pursued more practical medical studies.
Today, the continued prioritization of clan over public interest on the Korean Peninsula is widely known. The “curse of Confucianism” remains formidable.

Toward a Rule-of-Law State

One of the achievements of Japanese rule that Mr. L fairly assessed was the realization of the rule of law and the improvement of public security.
Before annexation, Korea was effectively ruled by the arbitrary “rule of men” exercised by kings and powerful clans.
There were no modern judicial or administrative systems; arbitrary judgments and taxation for the benefit of those in power prevailed.

Under these circumstances, Japan established a modern police system and restored public order.
A three-tier court system was introduced: the High Court in Keijō (present-day Seoul), appellate courts in Keijō, Pyongyang, and Taegu, and local courts, with corresponding prosecutors’ offices established at each level.
Among those who contributed to building this legal order were Korean prosecutors who passed the extremely competitive civil-service examinations, as well as numerous Korean police officers.
Japan’s reforms aimed at building a modern system of justice and public security deserve greater evaluation.

The Final Email

The final email I received from Mr. L arrived in June of Reiwa 6 (2024).
He reminisced fondly about his Japanese classmates from his old middle school days and expressed regret that their alumni association had been dissolved.
He concluded with these words:
“It has now become quite a long time since I last explained the realities of Japanese rule in Korea. My legs have grown weak, so I have refrained from driving since this year, but my memory remains vivid. Farewell, and goodbye.”
(Edited by Yoshihiro Kita)