Yesterday (24th), President Yoon Seok-yeol's remarks in an interview with the Washington Post (WP) became controversial. It said, "It is unacceptable to kneel to Japan because it happened 100 years ago." The opposition strongly protested. Critics said they were appalled by the perception of past history, saying it sounded like the Japanese prime minister's remarks.

Then, the chief spokesman of the People's Power Yoo Sang-beom immediately issued a comment. The Korean media misinterpreted the interview, saying that the original interview was 100 years ago, and that it was not "unacceptable to the president" to bow the knee to Japan, but that it was unacceptable "from Japan's point of view."

As the knee remark controversy shifted to the mistranslation controversy, a Washington Post reporter who was interviewed posted the full text of the interview on his social media.

Who's right, the SBS fact-check team asked the Washington Post directly.


Was the original article misinterpreted?

First, the original Washington Post article reads:


I cannot accept the idea that because of what happened 100 years ago, it is absolutely impossible to do something and that they [the Japanese] have to kneel [for forgiveness] because of our history 100 years ago. This is a matter that requires determination. ... In terms of persuasion, I believe I have done my best.
"I can't accept the notion that because of what happened 100 years ago, something is absolutely impossible [to do] and that they [Japanese] must kneel [for forgiveness] because of our history 100 years ago. And this is an issue that requires decision. ... In terms of persuasion, I believe I did my best." - The Washington Post, Ukraine, China main focus as South Korean president visits White House, April 4.


It was interpreted to mean that they decided on a third-party reimbursement plan as compensation for forced mobilization and did their best to persuade the dissenting people.

In the wake of the controversy, the Office of the President immediately posted the following notice to the press corps at the President's Office:


The background to my remarks (as above) was to the effect that this kind of approach would not be conducive to future relations between Korea and Japan. Normalization of relations between South Korea and Japan must be done and cannot be delayed. Just as the warring parties work together for the future despite the devastating war in Europe, improving relations between South Korea and Japan is the way to go. This is in the same vein that in '98, when the Kim Dae-jung-Obuchi Declaration was issued, President Kim emphasized in his speech to the Japanese Parliament that "it would be foolish to make the entire history of exchange and cooperation 50,1500 years meaningless because of an unfortunate history of less than 4 years." - Office of the Secretary for Foreign Communications, Office of the President, "We Inform You", April 24


Chief spokesman Yoo Sang-beom of the People's Power made the following comment: The original text of the interview was misinterpreted and reported by the Korean media.



Enlarge the image

In a Korean-language interview released by the President's Office, President Yoon Seok-yeol emphasized Europe's future-oriented cooperation, using the sentence without omitting the subject. And the sentence should be interpreted as "It is unacceptable (Japan) to kneel unconditionally." This is common sense when he says right after, "This is something that requires a decision." - People's Power Chief Spokesperson Yoo Sang-beom's commentary, April 4


In other words, the Korean media reported that "(I) cannot accept the perception that Japan should ask for forgiveness because of its history 100 years ago," but the original text said, "The perception that Japan should ask for forgiveness because of its history 100 years ago is unacceptable." In other words, it reads to mean that he was merely quoting Japan's thoughts, not the president's.

The <Washington Post> reporter Michelle Yehee Lee, who interviewed President Yun in the wake of the controversy, posted a full transcript of the president's remarks on her social media account this morning, saying, "I have double-checked the recording of the interview regarding the mistranslation controversy." I posted President Yun's remarks in Korean.



Enlarge the image


In the original text of President Yun's interview released by reporter Lee, the subject "I am" was mentioned.


Washington Post "We will stick to our reporting"

The SBS Fact-Check team saw Li's tweet and asked Li to check the facts once again. I was hoping you would judge what is correct about the recent controversy. Michelle Lee asked the Washington Post's communications team to send an official comment.

Half an hour later, I received a short response from the Washington Post's External Affairs team:


In response to your (SBS Facts) question, I would like to say that we (continue) stick to our reporting.
In response to your question, we stand by our reporting.


He also asked for a look at Reporter Lee's social media content, adding that his social media account was a literal transcript of President Yun's remarks.

The Washington Post's External Affairs team did not respond definitively to the conclusion that Yoo's allegations were wrong or not wrong. However, if you look at the original interview released by reporter Lee, the subject says "I am" and the article uses the expression "I can't accept", which can be seen as a sign that they will stick to their reporting because there is nothing wrong with it.

People's Power Senate spokesman Jang Dong-hyuk said at a briefing today, "I don't think it's going to flow into a debate about who is apologizing or who is kneeling, but I think it's important to accurately convey what the president's will and will are in light of the context behind and after."

(Writer: Kim Hyo-jin, Interns: Yeo Geun-ho, Yeom Jung-in) ► Intensive fact-checking on Korea-Japan relations (14)

: [Actually] Why the claim that "only South Korea apologizes badly" is a delusion
► Intensive fact-checking of Korea-Japan relations (<>): [Actually] "Japan has already apologized dozens of times"... Points
to Weigh ► Intensive Fact-Check on Korea-Japan Relations Part (<>): [Actually] "Japan's Apology for Past History" After analyzing the whole thing... The Wheel of 'Apology' and 'Remorse'
► Intensive Fact-Check on Korea-Japan Relations (<>) : [Actually] Lee Jae-myung "Sub-Chief's Budget Was Drastically Slashed", I Thought...
► Japan-South Korea Relations Intensive Fact Check (<>) : [Actually] Japan's Claim of "South Korea Releases Radioactively Contaminated Water"
► Japan-South Korea Relations Intensive Fact Check (<>) : [Actually] "<> times the standard value of Fukushima"... How much exposure is there?
► Focusing on Korea-Japan Relations Fact-Check (Part <>): [Actually] Democrats vs. Democrats on the same report, who is right?
► Intensive Fact-Check on Japan-South Korea Relations Part (<>): [Actually] Are imported munges from Fukushima sold domestically?
► Intensive Fact-Check on Japan-South Korea Relations (Part <>): [Actually] Is the "Munge Distinction" between domestic and Japanese products, correct?