In recent decades, the number of immigrants in South Korea has increased significantly. It is therefore inevitable that South Korea will move from a homogenous nation-state to a “multicultural society.” So, what exactly does “multiculturalism” mean for South Korea and what is the role of the South Korean government in dealing with this large influx of immigrants into South Korea? Therefore, this article analyzes South Korea's laws and policies regarding immigration and integration. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Existing immigration policies in South Korea focus on South Korea's two largest immigrant groups, namely migrant workers and migrant spouses. These policies identify the South Korean government's failure to grant equal legal citizenship rights to these two immigrant groups with "ethnic nationalism" and identify the extension of equal legal citizenship rights with "multiculturalism" (Lim, 2003; Lee and Park, 2005; This body of research effectively applies the concepts of ethnic nationalism and multiculturalism to suggest continuity in the South Korean state's ethnically homogeneous understanding of the Korean nation. However, this body of research reveals shortcomings in the use of a narrow legal approach and the failure to define both the terms "ethnic nationalism" and "multiculturalism." Therefore, these concepts cannot fully explain why and how South Korea's "multicultural" immigration laws and policies do not include immigrants as members of the South Korean nation. Although this article acknowledges that South Korea's multicultural society includes a wide variety of ethnic and cultural minority groups, this article focuses on state laws and policies regarding migrant workers and migrant brides. Beginning in 1988, South Korean governments revised Korea's immigration laws and policies in order to accommodate the influx of immigrants. Initially, they began to allow temporary immigration of migrant workers. Later, the administration began facilitating the permanent immigration of married migrants. Thus, the number of migrants in Korea increased rapidly to reach 2,416,503 in 2019, or 4.6% of the total population. This rapid increase in incoming migration has created pressure for a redefinition of Korea's mono-ethnic national identity. Therefore, starting in 2006, the administration began to implement "multiculturalism" as state policy. So how do South Korea's "multicultural" immigration and integration laws and policies regulate South Korea's criteria for national belonging and how do these laws and policies affect immigrant inclusion? as South Korean citizens? To answer these questions, we will examine immigration and integration laws and policies regarding migrant workers, the largest group of short-term migrants, and married migrants, the largest group of long-term migrants. immigration laws and policies regarding migrant workers. When Korean workers began to insist on their labor rights in the 1980s, their living standards improved and they became reluctant to do labor-intensive work (Kim, 2004). Thus, in 1987, the small and medium-sized business sector was faced with a labor shortageunskilled and low-skilled (Gray, 2007). To address this problem, laws and policies have been implemented to facilitate the temporary migration of low-skilled male migrant workers to Korea. In doing so, these laws and policies maximize the economic benefits of labor migration while maintaining its supposed ethnic homogeneity. In 1994, the Industrial Training Scheme (ITS) was introduced, promoting the temporary migration of low-skilled migrant workers. Under this system, the government commissioned the Korea Federation of Small Businesses (KFSB) to recruit migrant workers as "interns." Although officially referred to as “trainees,” Korean companies did not provide training to these migrant workers. Instead, these companies expected migrant workers to complete two years of manual labor before returning to their home countries. Despite migrant workers' expectations to pursue the "Korean dream", their relations with Korean society rapidly deteriorated as ITS exploited both non-ethnic minorities and economically exploited ethnic Korean migrant workers (Lim, 2006). . For example, the ITS excluded “interns” from the coverage afforded to full-time workers under the Korean Labor Standards Act and therefore did not enjoy basic labor rights (Gray, 2007). Additionally, the ITS prohibited “interns” from changing workplaces. Not to mention non-payment of wages, lack of overtime pay, excessive working hours, unsafe working conditions and non-existent workers' compensation as well as verbal, physical and sexual assaults (Lim, 2006). Unsurprisingly, the exploitation of the ITS system has provoked significant backlash from migrant workers. For Korea's growing civil society movement, continued violations of migrant workers' human rights have given rise to campaigns to improve migrant workers' rights. Together, their large-scale protests and petition campaigns led to the extension of modest but growing rights for migrant workers. For example, in 1993 the government granted "interns" the right to compensation in the event of a work accident, in 1997 the government amended the ITS and granted "interns" a three-year visa to two years of “internship” and one year of “work” and in 1998 the government provided protection to legal and illegal migrant workers under the Labor Standards Act. However, these improvements have not benefited illegal migrant workers, as they have not exercised their rights and reported violations of the law out of well-founded fear of deportation (Gray, 2007). Given the inability to solve the problems of ITS, the migrant rights movement has attempted to find more effective solutions to the problems of migrant workers. For example, in 1995, NGOs supporting migrants decided to establish the Joint Committee for Migrants in Korea (JCMK). The JCMK is committed to introducing a new legal framework, the Work Permit System (WPS). This system aimed to abolish STIs, extend the full range of national labor rights to all migrant workers, and provide full amnesty to illegal migrant workers in Korea. Initially, the government of Kim Dae-Jung, one of the main supporters of South Korea's democratization movement, sought to implement the WPS in 2000. However, the JCMK's efforts failed until the government of Roh Moo-Hyun, former human rights defender, lawyer. In 2004,the Roh Moo-Hyun administration implemented the “Employment Permit System” (EPS). This system provided legal migrant workers with full coverage under the Labor Standards Act. Additionally, illegal migrant workers were offered a time-limited amnesty and the opportunity to register as workers with the EPS. Thus, the number of illegal migrants has decreased considerably. However, this system also differentiated low-skilled migrant workers of Korean and non-Korean origin by granting the former preferential labor and settlement rights while prohibiting the latter from permanently settling in Korea. Therefore, South Korean governments have explicitly designed their labor migration laws and policies to prohibit the permanent settlement of non-ethnic Korean male migrant workers in Korea. On the other hand, these same administrations granted ethnic Korean migrants work and settlement rights so that they could contribute to the South Korean economy without jeopardizing its ethnic homogeneity. Therefore, the Overseas Korea Act was implemented in 1998 (Nora Kim, 2008). However, the Overseas Koreans Act initially only benefited highly skilled ethnic Koreans from "advanced" countries like the United States and excluded low-skilled Koreans from "underdeveloped" countries like China . In objection to this discrimination, Korean migrant NGOs have embarked on a vigorous campaign demanding equal treatment between low- and high-skilled ethnic Korean workers, based on their shared ethnicity. In response, the Roh Moo-Hyun administration amended the EPS in 2004 to include special work permits for low-skilled ethnic Koreans, which granted the right to a preferential allowance for jobs in the construction and services and the right to change workplace. Additionally, in 2010, the Overseas Koreans Act was amended so that it applies to all ethnic Koreans living overseas, regardless of their skill level or wealth. Thus, in contrast to the ban on the settlement of low-skilled, non-ethnic Korean migrant workers, South Korean governments expressly facilitated the permanent immigration of ethnic Korean migrant workers on the basis of their ethnic kinship. In conclusion, South Korean immigration laws for migrant workers adopt a different ethnocentric and developmentalist form of exclusion based on the lack of common ethnicity and the expected economic benefits of labor migration works towards the country. This is evident from the right to work and settlement of migrant workers classified along the patrilineal ethnicity divide between ethnic Korean male migrant workers and non-ethnic Korean migrant workers. By facilitating the temporary migration of migrant workers, non-ethnic and ethnic Korean migrant workers are known as a flexible workforce that contributes to the economy of the Korean nation-state. At the same time, banning the permanent stay of low-skilled non-ethnic Korean migrants maintains Korea's supposed ethnic homogeneity. However, as the next topic explains, South Korea's ethnic principle of patrilineal descent also facilitates immigration to the extent that later South Korean governments have actively encouraged ethnic Korean men to marry Korean women foreign and non-ethnic, assuming that these would be assimilated to "Koreans" ethnicallyand culturally. We will now examine the immigration laws and policies of married migrants. Starting in 1988, the rising cost of living in urban areas pushed families to limit their reproductive behavior. Thus, the Korean fertility rate fell from 2.1 children in 1984 to 0.98 children per family in 2018. This decline in the birth rate gives rise to an aging society. Young Korean women are migrating in groups to cities in hopes of finding better educational, professional and marital opportunities, exacerbating this trend in rural areas. This has caused a rural “crisis” because farmers cannot find wives to extend their family lineage. To address these issues, South Korean governments have implemented laws and policies to facilitate the permanent migration of ethnic Korean and Southeast Asian migrant brides to Korea. This subtheme argues that South Korea's "multicultural" immigration and integration laws and policies have facilitated the immigration of migrant brides to Korea based on the ethnocentric expectation of their sociocultural assimilability into the family Korean as “Korean” brides, daughter-in-laws. the law and mothers. As a result, Korean society relegates migrant brides who do not meet Korean ethnocultural norms to second-class citizens. Since the early 1990s, Korean governments began organizing "wedding tours" to encourage marriages between Korean farmers and women of Korean-Chinese descent. At the time, South Korean society expected these women to be devoted “Korean” wives and an ideal solution to South Korea’s demographic problems (Freeman, 2005). However, these expectations did not take into account the desires of migrant wives themselves, such as finding independence, adventure, entrepreneurship, and wanting to lead a “modern” life in a “developed country” (Freeman, 2005). However, these women ended up marrying poor, uneducated husbands living in rural villages. To make matters worse, Koreans expected these women to be grateful for the "opportunity" to live in a developed country, expecting them to adopt patriarchal gender roles as caregivers. and housewives and criticize them for not respecting Korean cultural norms. As a result, these Korean migrant brides ran away to escape the difficult circumstances they found themselves in. Therefore, measures have been taken to limit “fake marriages”. Due to Korea's continuing demographic problems, new legislation has been implemented to make marriage easier. immigration of migrant brides from Southeast Asia. For example, the legalization of the private sector of marriage brokers in 1999 facilitated the immigration of migrant brides on a commercial basis. Additionally, in 1997, the Nationality Law was amended so that male and female spouses of Korean nationals could obtain Korean nationality, but only after a two-year waiting period (Shim, 2012). As a result, migrant wives who divorced their Korean husbands before naturalization had to leave South Korea. However, since 2004, non-naturalized migrant wives who divorce their Korean spouses have been allowed to stay in Korea on the condition that they care for their Korean in-laws and children (Hyekyung Lee, 2008). Thus, South Korea's "multicultural" immigration and integration laws constituted the legal rights and duties of migrant brides as citizens in terms of their.