Who was sanctioned, and for what?

From March to May 2025, Kinpodo advertised family funerals in exclusively rented halls under the name 'Chiisana Mori no Ie' in television commercials at a price 'from 104,500 JPY'. In fact, apart from a few cases, customers had to pay at least 308,000 JPY; the order required a corrective notice, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

18 Sep 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Because revenue had been overstated at the company and its consolidated subsidiary or subsidiaries, the quarterly report for the third quarter of 2023 (filed on 10 November 2023) showed a consolidated loss of 1,382,861 thousand JPY instead of 1,662,516 thousand JPY; the registration statement for a share issue relied on this report, and on 26 February 2024 3,784,200 shares were issued for 3,999,899,400 JPY. After the company admitted the facts and the amount, an administrative monetary penalty (kachōkin) of 91,495,000 JPY was imposed: 1,500,000 JPY for the quarterly report and 89,995,000 JPY for the registration statement.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 172-4 Abs. 2 a. F., Art. 172-2 Abs. 1 Nr. 1, Art. 185-7 Abs. 1 und 14

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Mitigating circumstances

Both partial amounts were halved because the company had filed a report for a reduction before the inspection began (Art. 185-7(14) FIEA).

Published

17 Sep 2026

Original amount 91,495,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Through a software vulnerability in a mail platform developed by KDDI and provided to several internet service providers, unauthorised parties obtained the credentials (email address and password) of 12,231,954 people; 7,616,173 passwords were stored in plain text, so mailboxes could be read (discovered on 17 June 2026). The authority gave KDDI guidance (shidō) under Art. 147 APPI to improve its technical security measures because access controls against attackers spreading through the system had been inadequate, required a report by 19 October 2026 and also gave such guidance to individual providers responsible for the plain-text storage.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC, 個人情報保護委員会)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI, 個人情報の保護に関する法律) Art. 147, Art. 146 Abs. 1

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

19 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

SNOW Japan, to which South Korea's Snow Corporation had left decisions on advertising content in Japan for the jointly offered service, had users of X publish posts about the AI image functions of the 'SNOW' app from April 2025 onwards, for payment and following its instructions, without making the commission recognisable; the posts were treated as advertising by both companies. On 6 August 2026 each of them received an order to stop the display of posts still online, inform consumers and take measures to prevent recurrence.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 3 (Bekanntmachung zu Stealth-Marketing) Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Published

6 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

From February to May 2025 the online broker wrongly displayed at least 77 US ETFs and ETNs as eligible for NISA (59 clients traded 25 of them in the tax-advantaged account) and repeated this for a further security after discovery, handled affected clients carelessly and unequally, had since 2024 refused all transfers of holdings to other institutions, carried out no suspicious-transaction assessment for at least 1,531 rejected account applicants and managed cyber and system risks inadequately. Soliciting and accepting new accounts was prohibited from 19 June to 18 September 2026, together with a business improvement order.

Authority / court

Kanto Local Finance Bureau (関東財務局) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 52 Abs. 1, Art. 51; Art. 38 Nr. 1, Art. 43, Art. 40 Nr. 2 FIEA i. V. m. Art. 123 Abs. 1 Nr. 14 Cabinet Office Order on Financial Instruments Business; Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal Proceeds (犯罪収益移転防止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

19 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

GEO Store advertised, among other channels on the official GEO account on X, for example from 12 May to 8 June 2025, a 10% bonus on buy-back prices for used smartphones and tablets that was said to apply only until a certain date. In fact, the same or higher bonuses were available afterwards; the investigation was conducted jointly with the Chubu office of the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC, 公正取引委員会).

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

11 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

From February 2020 to May 2024, Excom Global advertised its rental of mobile Wi-Fi routers for travel abroad ('Imoto no WiFi') in travel-guide adverts and on its own websites as number one for customer satisfaction, for being chosen by overseas travellers and for customer service. The commissioned survey, without checking actual use, merely asked for impressions of the websites of the company and nine arbitrarily selected competitors and was also not reproduced accurately; a surcharge of 172,620,000 JPY was imposed.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

12 Mar 2026

Original amount 172,620,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In a promotional letter of January 2025 for its paid fan club 'TEAM26', the baseball club Chiba Lotte Marines gave the impression that every new member would definitely receive a ball hand-signed by a player at the booth by the stadium, although only some members received one. Instead of an order, a commitment plan was approved on 23 December 2025 – a board resolution, information for consumers, measures to prevent recurrence, allegedly a partial refund of annual fees and reports on implementation; no infringement was thereby established.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 30, Art. 31 Abs. 1 und 3 (Zusagenverfahren), Verdacht eines Verstoßes gegen Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

23 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Among other things, between 2004 and 2011 the credit cooperative had channelled loans taken out in the names of uninvolved people without their knowledge, and via shell companies, to a distressed large borrower group, thereby circumventing large-exposure limits; it had paid large cash sums to anti-social forces (hanshakai-teki seiryoku), carried out no suspicious-transaction assessments and given false reports and false statements to the supervisor. Besides a comprehensive business improvement order, lending to new clients was suspended from 17 November to 16 December 2025, combined with training of all staff away from day-to-day business and the immediate severing of ties with anti-social forces; it was the second order against the cooperative in 2025.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Act on Financial Businesses by Cooperatives (協同組合による金融事業に関する法律) Art. 6 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Banking Act (銀行法) Art. 26 Abs. 1; Art. 10 Nr. 2 und 3 (falsche Berichte und Aussagen); Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal Proceeds (犯罪収益移転防止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

31 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On the website of its 'NOVA' English schools, NOVA Language Company advertised several courses, for example in September 2024, by waiving an enrolment fee of 22,000 JPY (11,000 JPY for a children's course). The company had not charged anyone such a fee over a considerable recent period; the order required a corrective notice, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

17 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

From 8 October to 23 November 2024, Japanet Takata offered a two-tier New Year food box ('osechi' for 2025) in its online shop, stating that the 'Japanet regular price' of 29,980 JPY had been reduced by 10,000 JPY to 19,980 JPY, with the regular price presented as applying after the promotion ended. There was no reliable plan to sell at the higher price afterwards; the investigation was conducted jointly with the Kyushu office of the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC, 公正取引委員会).

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

12 Sep 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

P&G Japan advertised its 'Febreze bathroom anti-mould' product (ファブリーズ お風呂用防カビ剤), among other things on the packaging from April 2022 to May 2023, by claiming that simply placing it in the bathroom would prevent black mould for around six weeks. The documents submitted did not substantiate this effect, so the advertising was deemed misleading; the order required a corrective notice, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 und 2 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Published

1 Aug 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Between 17 August 2022 and 5 June 2023, in 18 shipments, the company exported a total of 523 items whose export to Russia is restricted, including motorcycles and personal watercraft, to Russia without the minister’s approval, declaring South Korea as the final destination. Under Art. 53(2) and (3) of the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act, the company was barred from 16 May 2025 to 15 May 2026 from exporting any goods listed in Appended Table 2-3 of the Export Trade Control Order to any destination, including via third parties. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI, 経済産業省)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act (外国為替及び外国貿易法) Art. 53 Abs. 2 und 3; Export Trade Control Order (輸出貿易管理令) Anhang 2-3

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

intentional

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 May 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Multi-insurer agencies had forwarded policyholder data to competing insurers, and insurance staff seconded to agencies had sent the agencies’ customer data to their employer without the agencies’ consent; from the agency channel alone, Tokio Marine & Nichido reported 1,004,861, Sompo Japan 799,331, Mitsui Sumitomo 319,915 and Aioi Nissay Dowa 221,144 affected records. The business improvement orders under Art. 132(1) of the Insurance Business Act require a compliance organisation for data protection and unfair competition law, customer data management also at the agencies, stricter rules on secondments, a review by external experts and a fundamental overhaul of the improvement plans submitted after the December 2023 order.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Insurance Business Act (保険業法) Art. 132 Abs. 1; Bezug zum APPI (個人情報保護法) und zum Unfair Competition Prevention Act (不正競争防止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

yes

Published

24 Mar 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Between June and November 2023 and between July and September 2024, the bank failed to assess at least 14,639 transactions flagged by its transaction monitoring for whether suspicious transaction reports were needed, and took up to 152 days on monthly average to file reports (February 2024). It had also not implemented the measures required by the supervisory AML/CFT guidelines by the end-March 2024 deadline and had not remedied findings from the previous inspection. The business improvement order under Art. 26(1) of the Banking Act requires, among other things, the outstanding reviews and reports to be completed and governance by the board and management to be fundamentally strengthened.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Suspicious activity reports

Legal basis

Banking Act (銀行法) Art. 26 Abs. 1; Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal Proceeds (犯罪収益移転防止法); Guidelines for AML/CFT der FSA

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Liability of senior managers

According to the reasons, the board and management neither established the facts themselves nor gave instructions despite repeated signals from backlogs, inspection findings and internal audit; the order requires responsibility to be clarified.

Published

26 Dec 2024

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

A person engaged in the firm’s proprietary trading had, on 9 March 2021, repeatedly placed several layered orders in the order book for the long-term JGB future (March 2021 contract) on the Osaka Exchange to create a false impression of active trading, and then bought lower or sold higher. After administrative proceedings were opened, Nomura admitted the facts and the amount; an administrative monetary penalty (kachōkin) of 21,760,000 JPY was imposed, made up of 6,940,000 JPY for the matched volume and 14,820,000 JPY for the excess purchases.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 174-2 Abs. 1 und 8, Art. 159 Abs. 2 Nr. 1; FIEA Enforcement Order Art. 33-13 Nr. 2; Art. 185-7 Abs. 1

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

31 Oct 2024

Original amount 21,760,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Oct 2024.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The company advertised its gym chain by claiming that add-on services such as self-service teeth whitening, self-service hair removal, massage chairs and workspaces could be used around the clock at no extra cost, although they were only available for a limited number of hours a day (for example five hours for teeth whitening). In addition, the company republished Instagram posts written by third parties for payment as 'customer reviews' on its own website without disclosing that it had commissioned them; both practices were prohibited by two orders on 8 August 2024.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 und Nr. 3 (Bekanntmachung zu Stealth-Marketing) Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

9 Aug 2024

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 8 Aug 2026 · Direct link

In its own online shop, the manufacturer set a 'WEB price', at which the devices had never been sold there, against a reduced 'campaign price' for seven notebook models, and announced deadlines after which the discounts still applied (example from October 2022: 187,880 JPY reduced to 148,425 JPY, 21% off). A surcharge of 42,230,000 JPY was imposed for this.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

2 Aug 2024

Original amount 42,230,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 2 Aug 2026 · Direct link

The two group securities firms and the bank received business improvement orders; the bank and the group holding company also had to report under the Banking Act. The firms had repeatedly, at one of the securities firms at least 13 times, exchanged non-public client information although the clients had prohibited this or had not consented, and in some cases used such information to win underwriting mandates. The bank also improperly negotiated underwriting allocations for that securities firm and in at least one case made this a condition of a loan agreement.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 51 und Art. 51-2; Art. 44-3 Abs. 1 Nr. 4 FIEA i. V. m. Art. 153 Abs. 1 Nr. 7 und 8 sowie Art. 40 Nr. 2 FIEA i. V. m. Art. 123 Abs. 1 Nr. 5 Cabinet Office Order on Financial Instruments Business; Art. 33 Abs. 1 und Art. 44-3 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 FIEA; Banking Act (銀行法) Art. 24 Abs. 1, Art. 52-31 Abs. 1

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

A then Deputy President of that securities firm personally received confidential client information from an executive officer of the bank; the orders required responsibility, including that of management, to be clarified.

Published

24 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 24 Jun 2026 · Direct link

The medical corporation promised people attending an internal medicine clinic it operates for a flu vaccination a reduction in the vaccination fee if they rated the clinic with five or four stars on Google Maps. Consumers could not recognise the resulting reviews as advertising prompted by the provider; the order required it to stop displaying them, inform consumers and take preventive measures that also cover the medical staff.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 3 (Bekanntmachung zu Stealth-Marketing) Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Healthcare

Published

7 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 6 Jun 2026 · Direct link

From April 2022 to January 2023, the utility claimed on its website and in a brochure that two household tariffs of one of its tariff plans were cheaper than its standard tariff for households using up to, or more than, 400 kWh a month respectively. Because the fuel-cost adjustment in these tariffs turned out higher, this was not true in some cases; following a joint investigation with a regional office of the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC, 公正取引委員会), a surcharge of 1,655,940,000 JPY was imposed (1,086,170,000 JPY for one tariff, 569,770,000 JPY for the other).

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Culpability

negligent

Published

28 May 2024

Original amount 1,655,940,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 May 2026 · Direct link

After the work PC of an employee at the company’s South Korean security contractor was infected with malware, unauthorised parties accessed its systems from 14 September to 27 October 2023; data of around 520,000 people (users of its messaging service, business partners, employees) were leaked or put at risk. The authority issued a formal recommendation under Art. 148(1) APPI for inadequate organisational security measures (Art. 23 APPI) and required reports until March 2025; in addition, it gave guidance (shidō) under Art. 147 over the possible exposure of user identifiers (GUID) on the group's auction platform.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC, 個人情報保護委員会)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI, 個人情報の保護に関する法律) Art. 148 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 23; Art. 147

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

28 Mar 2024

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 Mar 2026 · Direct link

In 2020 and 2021, the importer listed features as standard in printed and online data sheets and catalogues for three model variants from two model ranges and for an equipment package which were missing or – like certain driver-assistance functions – only worked with a separately ordered navigation package. Two surcharge orders issued on the same day (599,120,000 JPY for the models of one range, 631,850,000 JPY for the models of the other range) total 1,230,970,000 JPY.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1, Art. 9 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

For the equipment package on a model of the second range, the amount was halved under Art. 9 because the company had reported the facts itself; a report concerning a model of the first range was not recognised as such a report.

Published

12 Mar 2024

Original amount 1,230,970,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The holding company of a homebuilding group and four group companies advertised custom-built homes in 2022 and 2023 on websites, in social media posts and in flyers as 'No. 1' in three categories, such as the range of building plots on offer and 'high quality at low cost'. The underlying survey only asked for impressions of selected providers' websites and did not check whether respondents knew the services; on 29 February 2024 a cease-and-desist order was issued against each of the five companies.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Construction and real estate

Published

1 Mar 2024

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 Feb 2026 · Direct link

The four non-life insurers received business improvement orders under Art. 132(1) of the Insurance Business Act because, mainly in co-insurance for corporate clients, they had coordinated premiums and terms among themselves or via agencies, which in the authority’s view is likely to breach the Antimonopoly Act. By 26 December 2023, 576 affected policyholders had been reported; 33% of the cases were committed in the knowledge that they were improper, specific competition law rules of conduct were lacking and training on the subject was inadequate. The orders required further investigation, a competition law compliance organisation and clarification of management responsibility.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Insurance Business Act (保険業法) Art. 132 Abs. 1; Bezug zum Antimonopoly Act (独占禁止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

26 Dec 2023

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 26 Dec 2025 · Direct link

The bait manufacturer advertised four ranges of artificial fishing bait on packaging, its website and in promotional material – in some cases from April 2016 to February 2023 – as biodegradable even when left behind in the water after use. The company provided no substantiation for this biodegradability; following a cease-and-desist order of 19 December 2022, a surcharge of 17,740,000 JPY was imposed on 5 October 2023.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Culpability

negligent

Published

5 Oct 2023

Original amount 17,740,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Oct 2023.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 5 Oct 2025 · Direct link

Because of a misconfigured cloud environment at an affiliated contractor within the group, servers for two of the carmaker's connected-vehicle services were accessible from outside for around ten years; data of about 2.3 million people were affected, including in-vehicle device IDs, vehicle identification numbers and location data. The carmaker had not recognised these data as personal data, as the staff responsible had not been adequately trained, and had not checked the contractor’s access controls. The authority gave the company guidance (shidō) under Art. 147 APPI to improve training, access control and supervision of the contractor and to implement its own remedial measures.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC, 個人情報保護委員会)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI, 個人情報の保護に関する法律) Art. 147 i. V. m. Art. 23 und Art. 25

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

12 Jul 2023

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Jul 2025 · Direct link

The pizza chain advertised collection and delivery prices for 953 outlets in leaflets (handed out in store, posted through letterboxes or inserted in newspapers). In fact, between October 2022 and April 2023 – except for telephone or in-store orders during certain periods – a 'service fee' of 4 to 7 per cent of the price, capped at 299 JPY, was added; the order required a corrective notice to consumers, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Food and agriculture

Published

27 Jun 2023

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Jun 2025 · Direct link

From September 2018 to April 2022, the pharmaceutical manufacturer claimed on packaging, its own website, on television and in adverts on a video platform that products of its brand (room dispensers, clip-on sticks, sprays) remove airborne viruses and bacteria from indoor air by means of chlorine dioxide. The documents submitted did not substantiate this effect and the disclaimers on the packaging did not change the overall impression; the surcharge of 607,440,000 JPY is made up of individual amounts for five product groups, including 452,200,000 JPY for the room dispensers.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Culpability

negligent

Published

11 Apr 2023

Original amount 607,440,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Apr 2023.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 11 Apr 2025 · Direct link

The securities firm was barred from new block-offer business from 7 October 2022 to 6 January 2023 and received a business improvement order; its parent, a financial holding company, was ordered to take improvement measures. For ten listed shares, the firm had supported the closing price on the block-offer execution date through limit purchases (Art. 159(3) FIEA), its trade surveillance did not act on such single-day transactions, and staff up to executive managing officers exchanged non-public information with the group bank despite clients’ express wishes.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 52 Abs. 1, Art. 51, Art. 32-2 Abs. 2; Art. 159 Abs. 3 FIEA; Art. 44-3 Abs. 1 Nr. 4 FIEA i. V. m. Art. 153 Abs. 1 Nr. 7 Cabinet Office Order on Financial Instruments Business

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

According to the findings, executive managing officers were directly involved in improperly receiving and passing on non-public information; the order required management responsibility to be clarified.

Published

7 Oct 2022

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 7 Oct 2024 · Direct link

On 17 March 2019, the TV shopping company promoted a beauty roller using radio-frequency heat and EMS muscle stimulation in a TV shopping programme on BS satellite television, claiming that ten minutes of daily use over three to four weeks would slim the treated body area, such as the waistline. The documents the company submitted did not substantiate this effect, so the advertising was deemed misleading; a surcharge (turnover-based monetary payment) of 1,640,000 JPY was imposed.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

negligent

Published

16 Sep 2022

Original amount 1,640,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2022.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 16 Sep 2024 · Direct link