Did Japan's colonial rule of Joseon contribute to modernization? That's nonsense. It's a lie to escape punishment.

 Since modernization has been achieved in Korea thanks to the colonial rule of Japanese imperialism, Japan is a beneficiary, not a perpetrator, and Korea is a beneficiary, not a victim? The economy of the late Joseon Dynasty was on the verge of collapse, but it grew surprisingly during the Japanese colonial rule, and this foundation became the basis for modernization of Korea after liberation? It is too easy to force the legitimacy of aggression that robbed other countries of sovereignty and robbed, rape, and slaughtered civilians in other countries. It is difficult to find the truth of history, but it is easy to fabricate it. In 1911, the total per capita production in Joseon was $777 and $1,482 in 1937, but in 1944 it decreased to $1,330 due to the war. However, in 1945, when liberation took place, it sat down to $616 less than 1911. Why do you think this happened? This is where the simple conclusion is that economic growth on the Korean Peninsula during the Japanese colonial rule was not the growth of Koreans, but the growth of Japanese people. For example, in simple terms, the ownership rate of Korean farmland is about 18%, but considering the productivity of the land, the figure rises to the 50 percent range. It took up all the real land. At that time, Koreans were thoroughly discriminated against and regulated in terms of education, employment, and promotion. Of course, some of these regulations were eased at the end of the Japanese invasion and rule, but this is only an abnormal phenomenon caused by the recruitment of Japanese young people to the majority of the army due to the Sino-Japanese War and the Pacific War. Moreover, the legacy of Japanese aggression and rule did not contribute much to the modernization of Korea. According to statistics published in 1948 by the headquarters of the coalition forces in South Korea, Taiwan and China, South Korea now has only 25 percent of the North's economic level after liberation. The difference in quality was even worse, but the main facilities were in North Korea, and South Korea only benefited from the fact that the Governor-General of Korea was in Seoul. More than half of this was destroyed in the Korean War. The physical assets of Japanese imperialism that remained in Korea during the economic development period in the 1960s are less than a tenth of the original level. In addition to the fact that the Rhee Syng-man administration survived with the aid of the United States, the impact of the Japanese legacy was minimal. Of course, Joseon's growth rate, which exceeded 4% between World War I and World War II, was unusually high, but who did the fruits of that growth really go to? Also, did the results of Japan's growth after the Japanese colonial rule really become the basis of the Korean economy after liberation? It is true that rice production has increased in Japanese colonial era. However, in the 30 years since 1910, rice production has increased by 52.3%, while the Korean agricultural population has increased by 63.8%, and the Japanese have concentrated on fertile cultivated areas and owned one-fifth of Joseon's farmland, making very little income for Koreans. Modern factory industries developed, but 80% of them belonged to the Japanese, and they wore the coat of growth, but the actual development was in the hands of the Japanese. More importantly, right after liberation, Joseon's gross national product per capita was $616 and it returned to the poorest agricultural powerhouse in the world, less than $777 in 1911. There may be the influence of division and the Korean War, but the fact that it did not escape this state until economic development began in the 1960s means that the growth of Japanese rule was "development, not development," and in factually forcing subordination and discrimination, and trying to perpetuate such a structure. Therefore, the development of the Korean Peninsula during the Japanese colonial rule was virtually meaningless, replacing the development that Koreans could achieve on their own with colonial development, thus hindering the development of Koreans in the first half of the 20th century.

In fact, garbage junks such as colonial modernization, which can be friendly to Japan, are not worth studying. Those who are friendly to Japan and speak nonsense that harms Koreans with colonial modernization theory are just perfect waste to be eliminated in the future when they have personal problems and want to show off their intellectual superiority.