Talk:South Korean nationality law

Comment

Can we get a concrete example of a non-SK-citizen "of Korean descent" being drafted? I've heard these stories too, but we need something a bit more verifiable. -- Visviva 03:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Gaining SK citizenship?

Can someone add info about how to gain citizenship to South Korea?

The info can be found at US State Department website (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1018.html) scroll down to "Dual Nationality" section. Sorry I do not know how to add sources. This is in regards to the lack of source for the main article.

That's fine, but in the future it would be helpful if you specify which info... in this case the military-service info, rather than an answer to the question just above. -- Visviva 17:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is an english guide from a Korean government website that explains the requirements for naturalization. http://www.hikorea.go.kr/pt/InfoDetailR_kr.pt?catSeq=&categoryId=2&parentId=399&showMenuId=377

Examples

The section on people of Arab-Korean descent could use some more sourcing also. The population of, for example, South Koreans of Omani descent must be quite small; have there actually been problems reported in a reliable source? If not, how do we avoid violating WP:NOR here? -- Visviva 17:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Korea to permit dual citizenship for talented foreigners

• http://migrant.kr/?document_srl=20515

Jidanni (talk) 20:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a good development, and will make it easier for skilled Koreans to return, now that Korea has become such a livable place. Up till now, the only group I'm aware of that could hold dual citizenship past age 21 are those of royal descent. My kids, for example, did not get that letter from the Korean government at age 21 ("time to choose") because of our royal connection, but most young Korean/American males in that situation would choose the US citizenship if for no other reason than to avoid the Korean military service obligation. --Snow (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Eh? I thought South Korea did not officially recognize the monarchy. The latest english translation of the law (http://cryptmail.com/library/citizenship/korea.txt) makes no mention of any exception. I don't see it in the copy of the law on wikisource either, http://ko.wikisource.org/wiki/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD_%EA%B5%AD%EC%A0%81%EB%B2%95 But if you have a source that discusses this, I'd be very interested to learn more about this.

Considering dual citizenship is allowed for anyone, wouldn't that make this law moot? Presidentbalut (talk) 23:23, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

"including foreign citizens of Korean descent"?

Am I just bad at speaking English or the person who wrote this does not know what that means?

In addition, South Korean men over the age of 18, including foreign citizens of Korean descent, are subject to compulsory military service.

What I can understand from this is e.g. as a German citizen who is of Korean descendant should do military service in the RoK. How can the governement of the RoK force foreign citizens to do miliraty service only because their ancestors were Korean? If they meant dual citizenship holders, say so.130.83.142.97 (talk) 15:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The relevant law (I can't find an english translation, but the original korean version is also available from wikisource, http://ko.wikisource.org/wiki/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD_%EB%B3%91%EC%97%AD%EB%B2%95 ) does not seem to allow for foreign nationals to join the army. In fact, foreign nationals who naturalize in Korea and give up their original nationality (and thus are only Korean nationals) aren't required to join the army! This is actually one of the reasons that dual nationality is opposed in Korea (see http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/02/116_61565.html and http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/NEWKHSITE/data/html_dir/2010/02/19/201002190042.asp which mention this).

I have heard of ethnic Koreans who were forced into the SK army, despite lacking citizenship, but even then the (wrongly made) assumption was that these people were Korean citizens... (I only know about ancedotal stories, nothing verifiable.)

In all cases those foreign national Koreans were registered in the Korean family registry and thus are considered Korean citizens under Korean law. The main problem is that some ethnic Koreans are not even aware that someone from his family registered him in the family registry. That's why it is important for all ethnic Koreans to verify their status prior to a longer stay in Korea 175.193.212.16 (talk) 22:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Korean Citizenship From Marriage

The article mentions that you can acquire citizenship if you are married to a Korean. However, it does not go into detail. Is it simply that? Get married in Korea and apply for a Korean Passport?Presidentbalut (talk) 23:16, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on South Korean nationality law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1018.html#special_circumstance

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate article?

A separate article has recently been created at Citizenship of South Korea and may require merging with this one. Looking at Category:Nationality law, articles tend to be titled "Foo nationality law" or "Citizenship of Foo", but they don't appear to be separate or distinct topics. PC78 (talk) 21:57, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

While there is certainly overlap between nationality law and citizenship, there is an important distinction between a page that discusses legal norms and a page discussing the meaning of citizenship in a given country. Complex citizenship circumstances are becoming more common in today's globalized world, so there is significant value in highlighting these differences so that the consequences of liminal status are not overlooked. I have provided a few links to pages on Wikipedia that are dedicated to citizenship despite the simultaneous existence of a page regarding nationality or nationality law: United States nationality law, Citizenship of the United States, British nationality law, British subject, German nationality law,Citizenship of the European Union, etc. Yadayadalex (talk) 22:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Not my area of expertise so I'm happy to defer to your judgement, although I would expect a certain degree of overlap. I note that Citizenship of Japan redirects to Japanese nationality law, while Russian nationality law redirects the other way. PC78 (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that when I was researching content for this page. I suspect that some of these discrepancies have more to do with language (and translations) than content. Regardless, the argument that these topics are connected is irrefutable. But I would venture to say that it is still worthwhile to untangle them from each other in service of advancing the conversations happening around them.Yadayadalex (talk) 23:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Closing, given that independent notability has been established, at least for now. Klbrain (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:South Korean nationality law/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Editoneer (talk · contribs) 09:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Lead section

• [1] [2], I can't read the content, can you recite what it says there?  Done
  • The open access link here should work.
• The lead section is to explain shortly the topic. Try to put a simplified version of the history in the lead section..., like USAMGIK taking over, the naturalization, the women discrimination, Constituent National Assembly, 1948 law and then the reforms.  Done
  • Expanded the lead to briefly explain naturalization and notable features of ROK nationality. I don't think summarizing the history section there is that useful. If you're bringing in a second reviewer anyways, then I'll wait for their input.

History

• the traditional Joseon kingdom (...), is there a version of the Joseon kingdom that's not traditional?  Done
  • Rephrased that sentence.
• transitionary measures, can you replace with a simpler word?  Done
  • Temporary.
• could have it restored upon renunciation of that foreign nationality or their removal from the Japanese koseki., I believe "that" doesn't sound right because it's mostly used for pointing at something in an informal way. May you replace "that" with "their" and then remove the second "their" so it doesn't create a repetition?  Done
  • Sure.
• nationality of male heads of household. I don't feel "male heads of household" is correct, do you think it would be better if we worded it as "household male heads"?  Done
  • If I had to choose an alternative, I would pick "male household heads". But given that "head of household" is a common term, I would stick with the current phrasing.

Acquisition and loss

• and are not permitted to renounce ROK nationality until they have completed military service., I can't find the information in the source. May you quote it?  Done
  • The law citation already points to this but here's the copy:
    (3) Any person who was born while his lineal ascendent stayed abroad without the intention of permanently residing in any foreign country may make a declaration of his intention to renounce his Korean nationality under Article 14, only when the person falls under any of the following subparagraphs, with respect to his obligation for military service: Amended by Act No. 10275, May 4, 2010; Act No. 14183, May 29, 2016
    1. Where he has completed, or is deemed to have completed, his active military service, full-time reserve service or replacement status;
    2. Where he is enlisted in the second militia service;
    3. Where he is exempt from military service.

Rights and restrictions

• Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). Change it to North Korea to be consistent as the paragraph mentions North Koreans. If you are planning this change please change and the other thingies that mentions DPRK. But I'm not sure about ROK, so I believe we can keep South Korea like that.
  • That's the formal name of North Korea. North Korea and DPRK refer to the same thing. This request doesn't make sense.
  • I meant to refer it as North Korea because the article mentions "North Korea citizens" instead of "citizens of Democratic People's Republic of Korea", but considering the changes it doesn't matter anymore. Editoneer (talk) 11:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

The article appears to be well-done from all the criterias, after you're done correcting the article, I'm going to put it on 2ndopinion. You can debate changes or anything, good luck. Editoneer (talk) 12:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

• @Editoneer: Addressed changes. Horserice (talk) 08:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
• I apologise for delaying, thank you. Editoneer (talk) 11:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
• @Editoneer: Per WP:RGA#Get a second opinion, would you please explain what precisely you need a second opinion about? Thank you. (If you're satisfied with the article, you are of course welcome to pass it without any additional input.) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
• @Extraordinary Writ:, I forgot to specify. I needed a second opinion from somebody else to check the article all over again in case there still mistakes that I'm just not seeing, I also did this progress with past articles, thank you. Editoneer (talk) 04:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

 

Starts GA 2nd Opinion; the review will follow the same sections of the Article.

 

---

Citizenship might scope to include

• statement on respect for courts and rule of law
• statement of allegiance to the Crown and its successors
• statement of adherence to national values
• statement in the national language or as admitted, other languages

• A citizenship pledge

I pledge my loyalty to *nation* and its people,
whose democratic beliefs I share,
whose rights and liberties I respect, and
whose laws I will uphold and obey.

Final Comments

• Reference 1 is an excellent overview of the history of Citizenship and current issues of citizenship in South Korea

• with regard to Japanese occupation of Korea, there is a need to refer to the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and South Korea declared that the unequal treaties between Japan and Korea, especially those of 1905 and 1910, were "already null and void" Refer to:~ Hook, Glenn D. (2001). Japan's International Relations: Politics, Economics, and Security. p. 491. ISBN 9780415240970. "Article II. It is confirmed that all treaties or agreements concluded between the Empire of Japan and the Empire of Korea on or before August 22, 1910 are already null and void."

• male heads of households is common terminology for English speaking countries, in particular, those nations which regularly conduct census of their population.

• Reference 50 is an excellent overview of post-war citizenship issues, post the Treaty of San Franciso (1952) and special permanent residents.

 

@Editoneer:@Extraordinary Writ:

Recommend passing the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 11:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.