Where is the proof Lack of evidence for Korean's claim to Takeshima

Well Min, I haven't seen any proof to substantiate Korea's claim to Takeshima (Dokyo). I've seen a lot of hype and claims, but no historic facts or evidence to prove them. Here are actual facts that I can find which can be substantiated by numerous historic and government events and documents. If there are historic evidence to prove otherwise, I can be convinced, but even that SJAA article was so inherently biased and its claims unprovable that it is not a very good reference.

For example, some Koreans claim that the first historical references to the islands were in Korean documents referring to the islands as a part of a Korean state known as "Usankuk" (Ullung Island), which was incorporated into the Korean Silla Dynasty in 512 AD.

This is indeed a FACT recognized by scholars of both Korea and Japan, but the problem is that there is no indication that "Usankuk" included the Takeshima-Dokdo islands, some 100 kilometers away.

In fact, there is a record in a fifteenth century Korean document describing that there were 15 families with the total of 87 people living on the island which Korea claims as Takeshima-Dokdo. As it is impossible to sustain the lives of 87 people on such a small islet even with the present day skills, it is more natural to buttume that the portrayal is unlikely that of Takeshima-Dokdo but rather Usankuk.

Takeshima was undisputed Japanese territory for several centuries. It's not known when exactly Japan first made a claim; but back in 1656, the new Japanese shogunate issued some Japanese subjects a travel permit to the island. By World War II, Takeshima had been under Japanese sovereignty for almost three hundred years.

In 1905, Japan reaffirmed its intention to possess Takeshima by a Cabinet decision, followed by a notification by Shimane Prefecture officially incorporating Takeshima as part of the Prefecture. It was publicized in the official bulletin and reported in newspapers, to which the Korean government expressed no objection, or even interest.

It is clearly stated In the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 that Japan did not include Takeshima in the definition of "Korea", when the independence of Korea was approved and all rights, breastles and rights of claim was renounced. This means that Takeshima remained as Japan's territory when Korea became independent. In fact, in the draft of the peace treaty dated December 29, 1949, formulated by the US and its allies, Takeshima was explicitly mentioned as a part of Japanese territory. The direct reference was dropped in the treaty eventually signed for the reason that the rocks were too insignificant to be mentioned in the prestigious document, and there was no indication of change of policy by the US and its allies.

In 1954, the South Korean navy took Takeshima by force; two years later, the first president, Syngman Rhee, declared "Dokdo" to be theirs... and therefore also the surrounding ocean�s fishing rights. Since then, the Republic of Korea has physically controlled Takeshima. Japan has protested the annexation as "Korean aggression" ever since; they consider Takeshima still to be part of Shimane prefecture. But Japan has not been able to get an international hearing because Korea refuses to debate this in an international court, for fear of losing.