Financial Instruments and Exchange Act Enforcement Actions in Japan

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Buddy Capital Co., Ltd. (Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 6011001137238, CEO Kei Suzuki, Capital 3 million yen, 38 full-time employees, Investment Advisory and Agency Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. On this day, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action based on Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Daiichi Premier Securities Co., Ltd., and found issues related to the financial instruments business operator. On the same day, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended that the Prime Minister and the Financial Services Agency Commissioner take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the FSA Establishment Act.

The company sets the price for acquiring real estate owned by related parties such as parent companies based on the appraisal value of the property, as stipulated in Article 201, Paragraph 1 of the Act on Investment Trusts and Investment Corporations, with the appraisal value serving as the upper limit for the acquisition amount. When obtaining the appraisal, the company selects a real estate appraiser through an internal approval process based on objective criteria such as industry track record in real estate securitization to ensure neutrality and objectivity, and then provides the property information to the appraiser to obtain an appraisal report.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of G&D Advisors Inc., a financial instruments business operator, and found issues related to the conduct of the business. On the same day, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended that the Prime Minister and the Financial Services Agency Commissioner take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Tachibana Securities Co., Ltd. (Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 7010001049582, President Chiharu Hirose, capital 6.6957 billion yen, 443 full-time employees, First and Second Type Financial Instruments Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. On this day, the Financial Services Agency's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the FSA Commissioner to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the FSA Establishment Act.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in the change report related to Sakai Holdings Co., Ltd. stocks

The Financial Services Agency, based on the inspection results regarding the dissemination of rumors related to Human Metabolome Technologies Inc. from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission, issued a recommendation for a surcharge payment order. On August 2, 2024, a decision was made to initiate adjudication proceedings (Reiwa 6 Year (Han) No. 15 Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation case). The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 12 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Financial Instruments and Exchange Act') and the amount of surcharge payable. Following this, the adjudicator submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge based on the provisions of Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. Accordingly, a decision was made as follows.

On June 21, 2024, a decision was made to commence a trial procedure (Case No. 10 of the 2024 fiscal year, violation of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act) following a recommendation from the Financial Instruments and Exchange Commission to impose a surcharge based on the results of an inspection of an employee involved in contract negotiations with Stream Media Corporation. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 17 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Financial Instruments and Exchange Act') and the amount of surcharge payable. Based on this, a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge was submitted by the trial judge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, leading to the following decision.

Regarding the order to pay the surcharge, a correction decision was made on October 9, 2024, for the surcharge payment order decided on August 27, 2024 (PDF: 88KB).

Based on the results of an inspection regarding false accounting related to five investment units of Nomura Real Estate Master Fund Investment Corporation, a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. A decision was made to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 12 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. Accordingly, a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge was submitted based on the provisions of Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. Therefore, it was ordered that the surcharge be paid into the national treasury.

Decision to order payment of administrative monetary penalty for false statements in quarterly reports at Ardepro Co., Ltd.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports by Sakai Holdings Co., Ltd.

Order to Sincia Komuten Co., Ltd. to pay surcharge to the national treasury.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for failure to submit large shareholding reports related to Mitsuboshi Kabushiki Co., Ltd.

An investigation into the solicitation of our investment advisory contract concluded that violations of laws were identified.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended administrative sanctions against the relevant financial instruments business operator due to identified issues.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recognized issues related to the registered financial institution and, today, recommended to the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency that administrative sanctions be imposed pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended administrative sanctions after identifying issues related to the financial instruments business operator.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action under Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Services Agency Establishment Act.

Issues related to investor protection in financial product brokerage business.

Order the defendant to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as follows.

Order the respondent to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as described below.

Our company could not verify the actual business activities of the corporation in question, nor was there any evidence submitted indicating that we provided consulting services commensurate with the fees paid by the corporation. It was observed that Representative Inoue transferred funds from a personal bank account in his own name to a bank account in the corporation's name, then transferred the funds to our company's bank account. As a result, at least approximately 19 million yen transferred by Representative Inoue, which was claimed to be revenue from consulting services obtained from the corporation, was found to be funds contributed from his personal account, and only made to appear as revenue from consulting services. Our company is deemed to have recorded fictitious revenue (sales) related to such consulting services.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Asunaro Corporation and found issues related to its financial instruments business. The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended administrative sanctions to the Prime Minister and the Financial Services Agency Commissioner based on Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Based on the results of an investigation into insider trading by an employee who received information from a negotiator involved in contract negotiations with Stream Media Corporation, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a surcharge payment order. On June 21, 2024, a decision was made to initiate a trial procedure (Reiwa 6 Year (Han) No. 9 Financial Instruments and Exchange Act Violation Trial Case). Subsequently, a draft decision was submitted by the judge to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. The decision was made as described below.

Decision to modify the order for payment of surcharge related to false statements in securities reports concerning Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified to the respondent.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a payment order for a surcharge based on the results of an inspection related to stabilization operations concerning Oomori Kogyo Co., Ltd. After initiating the adjudication process, the respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178-1, Item 15 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Consequently, a decision was made to impose the surcharge.

The company conducted stress tests using falsified data despite the deterioration of test results, and did not report based on accurate data. Additionally, the company did not take necessary measures based on the stress test results.

Decision on payment order of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports by Kyokutou Co., Ltd.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports by Yamauura Co., Ltd.

Based on the results of an investigation into insider trading involving an employee of Nagoya Denki Kogyo Co., Ltd., a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. Subsequently, a decision was made to initiate an administrative hearing procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 16 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge payable. In response, the presiding officer proposed a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Act. Accordingly, a final decision was made.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of AMI Corporation (Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 7010001011914, President Kazuhiko Sugawara, capital 32 million yen, one full-time employee, engaged in investment advisory and agency services, hereinafter referred to as 'the Company'). As a result, issues related to the financial instruments business operator were identified. On this day, the Financial Services Agency's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended to the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency, pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the FSA Establishment Act, that administrative sanctions be imposed.

The Financial Services Agency decided to impose a surcharge payment order regarding insider trading by an overseas resident communicated by ZOZO Inc. employees. The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended the surcharge payment order based on inspection results received from ZOZO Inc. employees. On October 13, 2023, a decision was made to initiate a trial procedure under the Act on Regulation of Conduct in Financial Instruments Transactions (Reiwa 5, No. 8), and the trial has been conducted by three judges. Recently, a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge was submitted by the judges based on Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. The decision was made as follows.

Decision to impose a surcharge payment order for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified to the respondent.

Decision to order payment of surcharge regarding recommended acts by negotiators of AlphaX Food System Co., Ltd.

The Financial Services Agency decided to order Yamaha Corporation to pay a surcharge related to market manipulation of its stock. The decision followed a recommendation from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission based on inspection results. On November 11, 2021, a hearing process was initiated (Case No. 5 of 2021, violation of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act). The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. Based on this, a draft decision to order payment of the surcharge was submitted by the adjudicator pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Act. The decision was made as described below. For details, see the summary of the decision (PDF: 217KB).

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Order the respondent to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified below.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports by GALA Corporation

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission inspected Shinsei Investment Management Co., Ltd. (Chuo-ku, Tokyo; Corporate Number 1010001076871; President and CEO Harai Haruko; Capital 495 million yen; 27 full-time employees; engaged in investment management, investment advisory and agency services, and second-class financial instruments business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. Today, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Decision to impose a surcharge payment order for insider trading by an information recipient from MINKABU THE INFONOID Co., Ltd. officers

Based on the results of an investigation into market manipulation related to long-term government bond futures, a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. After initiating the adjudication process, the respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Consequently, a decision was made to impose the surcharge.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for failure to submit large shareholding reports related to Sakai Holdings Co., Ltd.

The Financial Services Agency's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised SBI Securities Co., Ltd. to take administrative action for accepting purchase orders related to listed financial products while knowing that such actions could artificially influence the market prices of those products, causing the prices to not reflect actual market conditions.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Stock Japan Co., Ltd. (Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 8010401120108, CEO Tetsuro Kawabata, capital 10 million yen, 19 full-time employees, investment advisory and agency business). As a result, issues related to the financial instruments business operator were identified. On the same day, the Financial Services Agency's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the FSA Establishment Act.

Decision to order payment of surcharge regarding specific involvement in false disclosure documents submitted by D.D.S. Corporation.

Based on the results of an inspection revealing false statements in securities reports filed by Amana Corporation, a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. A decision was made to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 4 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge payable. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Consequently, a final decision was made to impose the surcharge.

Decision on payment order of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Ordered the defendant to pay a surcharge of 270,000 yen to the national treasury as specified.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Miki Securities Co., Ltd. (Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 6010001058023, President and CEO Takashi Suzuki, Capital 500 million yen, 164 full-time employees, Type 1 Financial Instruments Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. On this day, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Financial Services Agency Commissioner to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Issues related to investor protection in the financial product brokerage business.

Based on the results of an inspection related to the transmission from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission concerning the facts related to the implementation of a public tender offer by employees of N-Field Co., Ltd., a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. A decision was made to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 17 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge based on Article 185-6 of the Act. Accordingly, a decision was made.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Union Securities Advisors Co., Ltd. (Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 3011201019668, President Kenjiro Sugiyama, Capital 9.8 million yen, 49 full-time staff and external agents, Financial Instruments Intermediary Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments intermediary business were identified. Today, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified to the respondent.

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified for the respondent.

Order the respondent to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as follows.

Decision to impose a surcharge payment order for false statements in securities reports, etc.

The Financial Services Agency, based on the results of an inspection by the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission regarding recommendation actions related to a public tender offer by Taisei Corporation employees, received a recommendation for a payment order of surcharge. On September 16, 2022, a decision was made to initiate a trial procedure (Reiwa 4 (Han) No. 13 Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation trial case). The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 17 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as the

Order to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as follows to the respondent.

The Kanto Financial Bureau conducted an inspection of Merchant Brains Investment Advisory Co., Ltd. (Minato-ku, Tokyo; Corporate Number 9010001175146; CEO Yutaro Kato; Capital 8 million yen; five full-time employees; Investment Advisory and Agency Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. On this day, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Financial Services Agency Commissioner to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission conducted an inspection of SMBC Nikko Securities Inc. (Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Corporate Number 7010001125714, President and CEO Yuichiro Kondo, capital 10 billion yen, 9,440 full-time employees, First and Second Type Financial Instruments Business, Investment Advisory and Agency Business, Investment Management Business). As a result, issues related to this financial instruments business operator were identified. Accordingly, today the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission advised the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action pursuant to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Based on the results of an inspection related to market manipulation involving Nippon Sheet Glass Co., Ltd. and one other stock, a recommendation was made to pay a surcharge. A decision was made to initiate a trial procedure (Reiwa 4th year (Han) No. 12 Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation trial case). During the process, the respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Financial Instruments and Exchange Act') and the amount of surcharge to be paid. Based on this, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, which led to the final decision to impose the surcharge.

Based on the results of an investigation into market manipulation related to long-term government bond futures, a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order. Subsequently, a decision was made to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge payable. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Accordingly, a decision was made as follows.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

The Fair Trade Commission received a recommendation to pay a surcharge based on inspection results related to market manipulation involving Kabushiki Kaisha Kyosha. A decision was made to initiate adjudication proceedings. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178-1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge payable. Based on this, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge under Article 185-6 of the same Act. Consequently, a decision was made to impose the surcharge.

Decision to order payment of surcharge for false statements in securities reports by Asia Development Capital Co., Ltd.

On December 24, 2019, a decision was made to initiate a trial procedure following a recommendation from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission for a surcharge payment order based on an investigation into insider trading by an executive involved in contract negotiations with Inotech Co., Ltd. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 16 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereafter

The Financial Services Agency, upon receiving a recommendation from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission to impose a surcharge based on the results of an investigation into market manipulation involving Kabushiki-gaisha Spankurīto Kōporēshon, initiated adjudication proceedings on May 11, 2022. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereafter

Based on the results of an inspection regarding false statements in quarterly reports by MTG Co., Ltd., a recommendation was made to impose a surcharge payment order. A decision was made to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 4 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. In response, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Accordingly, a decision was made.

Order the respondent to pay a surcharge to the national treasury as follows.

The Financial Services Agency's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a payment of surcharge based on inspection results related to market manipulation of Kawada Technologies Inc. On March 30, 2022, a decision was made to initiate adjudication proceedings (Case No. 17 of FY 2021, violation of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act). The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts and the amount of surcharge payable as specified in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as

Order to pay a surcharge to the national treasury as follows to the respondent.

Based on the results of an investigation into insider trading related to FamilyMart Co., Ltd., a recommendation was made for a surcharge payment order following a decision to initiate a trial procedure. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 16 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge payable. In response, the presiding officer submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the same Act. Accordingly, a decision was made as described below.

Decision on payment order of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

The Financial Services Agency recommended the Prime Minister and the Director of the Financial Services Agency to take administrative action based on Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

When requesting real estate appraisal evaluations from a real estate appraisal company obtained through the company's parent company, Nippon Escon Co., Ltd., the company engaged in inappropriate efforts that compromised the independence of the appraisal company from the perspective of proper conflict of interest management. Additionally, the company employed an inappropriate process for selecting the real estate appraisal company.

Decision on payment order for penalties regarding false statements in securities reports, etc.

Order the defendant to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as follows.

Decision on payment order of surcharge for false statements in securities reports, etc.

Order the respondent to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as follows.

Based on the results of an investigation into insider trading by information recipients from Oncolys BioPharma Inc., the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission received a recommendation to pay a surcharge. A draft decision was submitted by a judge to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. Therefore, it was ordered that the surcharge be paid to the national treasury.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a surcharge payment order based on inspection results related to fictitious trades in the shares of Sanshin Construction Industry Co., Ltd. A decision to initiate a trial procedure was made on April 24, 2020, under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation case No. 1 of 2020, and the trial has been conducted by three judges. Recently, a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge was submitted by the judges based on Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. The following decision was made accordingly.

The Financial Services Agency, based on the results of a market manipulation investigation into GNI Group Inc. and one other stock by the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission, issued a recommendation for a surcharge payment order. On December 21, 2021, a decision was made to commence adjudication proceedings (Reiwa 3rd Year (Han) No. 8, Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation case). The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereafter referred to as [Kinshoho]) and the amount of surcharge payable. Following this, the adjudicator received a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge based on Article 185-6 of the Kinshoho. Accordingly, a decision was made as described below.

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a payment order for a surcharge based on the results of an inspection into market manipulation related to Gumi Inc. Following the decision to initiate a trial procedure, the respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. Based on the provisions of Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, a draft decision ordering the payment of the surcharge was submitted, and a decision was made.

The Financial Services Agency, based on the results of an inspection of insider trading by employees of Leopalace 21 Corporation received from the Financial Instruments and Exchange Surveillance Commission, received a recommendation to impose a surcharge payment order. On February 4, 2022, a decision was made to commence adjudication procedures (Reiwa 3rd Year (Han) No. 12, Financial Instruments and Exchange Act violation case). The respondent submitted a statement admitting the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 16 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (hereinafter referred to as the

The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission recommended a payment order for a surcharge based on the results of an inspection related to stock price manipulation involving Mitsuba Corporation. A decision was made to initiate adjudication proceedings. The respondent submitted a statement acknowledging the facts listed in Article 178, Paragraph 1, Item 14 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the amount of surcharge to be paid. Based on this, the presiding judge submitted a draft decision to order the payment of the surcharge pursuant to Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, and a final decision was made.

The respondent is ordered to pay the surcharge to the national treasury as specified.

Decision to impose a surcharge payment order for false statements in securities reports

The Financial Services Agency, based on a recommendation from the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission regarding a penalty payment order related to Sakaeya Co., Ltd., initiated adjudication procedures on September 18, 2020, under the case number Heisei 2-nen (Han) No. 9, for violations of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. Since then, three adjudicators have conducted proceedings. Recently, a draft decision to order the payment of the penalty was submitted by the adjudicators based on Article 185-6 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. The decision was made as described below.