I wonder if he wanted to exaggerate Joseon's dependency on China because of his personal Chinese nationalism, or if he genuinely disliked redundant. but considering our conversation, i think he just doesn't like overlapping years. I tried to write concisely and specifically for those who lack understanding of the system, but he continued to oppose it because the years overlapped. So let's try to make it more concise. Because the tributary relationship and the period of vassalage overlap. Subs...
| status = [[Independent state]] {{efn|Joseon maintained nominal [[Tributary system of China|Tributarytributary relations]] with [[Ming dynasty|MingImperial]] and [[Qing dynasty|QingChina]]<br/>{{smallfrom 1401 to 1895. See the "[[#Foreign relations|(1401–1895)Foreign relations]]" section for more information.}}{{NoteTagefn|The [[Tributary system of China|Chinese tributary system]] was a largely-symbolic Confucian world order, with its basis in trade and philosophical relations between foreign states and various Chinese dynasties. Its relation to the sovereignty of some states was flexible and diverse. Larger states, such as Joseon Korea and Japan, enjoyed full sovereignty in both domestic and foreign affairs, and their international status cannot be considered 'client states'. However, after 1882 [[Imo Incident]], the Qing dynasty abandoned its laissez-faire policy, signed the [[China–Korea Treaty of 1882]], and became directly involved in the affairs of Joseon. The "radical change in China's policy" was in reaction to the growing influence of European powers and of Japan in Korea. The political influence of the Qing Dynasty ended in 1895 with the [[Treaty of Shimonoseki]].}} <br/>{{small|(1392–1882, 1895–1897)}}<br/><br/>[[Client state]] of [[Qing dynasty]]<br/>{{small|(1882–1895)}}<ref>{{cite news |url = http://www.isr.or.jp/TokeiKen/pdf/gakusai/1_05.pdf |script-title = ja:グローバル化への対応－中・日・韓三国の分岐－ |publisher = Statistical Research Society |author = Mitani Hiroshi (三谷博) |date = 18 January 2016 |language = ja |quote = Statistical Research Society Journal No. 1 (統計研究会『学際』第1号) }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url = https://www.jkcf.or.jp/history_arch/first/3/02-0j_harada_j.pdf |script-title = ja:東アジアの国際関係とその近代化－朝鮮と－ |publisher = The Japan-Korea cultural foundation |author = Harada Damaki (原田環) |date = 12 June 2005 |language = ja |quote = Joint Research Report on Japan-Korea History No. 1 (日韓歴史共同研究報告書 -第1期-) }}</ref>{{sfn|Lin|2014|pp=69–71}}<ref>{{cite news |url = https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002294908 |title = Japanese Awareness about Joseon's International Legal Status after Imo Military Rebellion |publisher = [[Korea Citation Index]] |author = Yoo bada |date = 13 July 2017 |language = en |quote = Qing arranged for the conclusion of the [[Joseon–United States Treaty of 1882|Joseon-America Treaty]] in 1882, and regulated the [[China-Korea Treaty of 1882|Joseon-China Regulation]] after suppressing the [[Imo incident|ImO Military Rebellion]] and defined Joseon as a SemiSovereign or Dependent State based on the Elements of International Law...If so, Joseon would gain the international legal status of protectorate and his sovereignty should be limited. }}</ref>
