In criminal investigations across any jurisdiction, definitively establishing the perpetrator's identity (hanninsei, 犯人性, in Japanese) is paramount, especially when direct evidence like clear eyewitness testimony, unambiguous CCTV footage, or definitive forensic links are scarce. In Japan, one of the most compelling ways to solidify a suspect's

Japan has been grappling with a persistent and evolving form of organized crime known as "special fraud" (tokushu sagi, 特殊詐欺). These schemes, often targeting the elderly and vulnerable, involve sophisticated social engineering and a complex division of labor among perpetrators. While masterminds remain elusive, law enforcement frequently apprehends

Proving a suspect's state of mind, particularly their deceptive intent, is often the most challenging aspect of prosecuting fraud cases. This is especially true in everyday scenarios like "dining and dashing" – known in Japan as musen inshoku (無銭飲食) – where individuals consume food or services and then

Establishing a suspect's criminal intent, or mens rea, is a cornerstone of criminal law globally. In cases of attempted murder, proving the specific "intent to kill" – known in Japanese jurisprudence as satsui (殺意) – presents a unique challenge for investigators. How can one definitively prove what was

In many criminal investigations, physical evidence plays a crucial role in reconstructing events and corroborating testimonies. However, there are numerous instances, such as in certain types of harassment, attempted crimes, or even voyeurism where no image is successfully captured or recovered, where tangible "hard" evidence is minimal or

A confession from a suspect can be a pivotal piece of evidence in any criminal investigation. However, its evidentiary value is not absolute; it hinges critically on its perceived credibility. In the Japanese criminal justice system, while confessions have historically played a significant role, contemporary practices, underscored by reforms such

In the realm of criminal investigations, the primary focus of an interrogation is typically to ascertain the facts surrounding the alleged offense—the corpus delicti. However, in certain types of cases within the Japanese criminal justice system, particularly those involving drug offenses, an equally critical area of inquiry emerges: the

In the intricate dance of a criminal investigation, it is not uncommon for a suspect's account of events to shift, evolve, or even directly contradict earlier statements. This phenomenon, known in Japanese criminal procedure as kyōjutsu no hensen (供述の変遷 – changes in statements), presents a significant challenge for investigators.

The initial questioning of a suspect in Japan, a procedure often referred to as Benkai Roku-shu (弁解録取), is a critical juncture in any criminal investigation. It's typically the first formal opportunity for investigators to hear the suspect's side of the story regarding the alleged offense. Unlike

The landscape of criminal interrogations in Japan has undergone a seismic shift in recent years, moving from a system heavily reliant on investigator-prepared written records to one increasingly characterized by transparency through audio-visual recording. This transformation, primarily driven by amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure in 2016 and fully

Determining the fair value of shares in non-listed companies is a frequent and often contentious issue in Japanese corporate law. Unlike their publicly traded counterparts, these shares lack a readily ascertainable market price, necessitating the use of specific valuation methodologies when disputes arise. Such situations are common, for example, when

In the lifecycle of a corporation, there are circumstances where a controlling shareholder or the company itself may seek to consolidate ownership entirely, leading to the compulsory acquisition of shares held by minority shareholders. This process, commonly known as a "minority squeeze-out" (少数株主の締め出し - shōsū kabunushi no shimedashi)

The financial architecture of any corporation is significantly shaped by its rules governing capital and distributions to shareholders. In Japan, the Companies Act (会社法 - Kaisha-hō) establishes a "capital system" (資本制度 - shihon seido) that dictates how much of a company's net assets can be distributed

The integrity of a company's capital base is a cornerstone of corporate law. When shares are issued, the expectation is that the company receives genuine economic value in return. However, practices involving "fictitious payments" (仮装払込み - kasō haraikomi) for shares—where the appearance of payment is

In the sophisticated landscape of Japanese corporate finance, "New Share Acquisition Rights" (新株予約権 - shinkabu yoyakuken) serve as versatile instruments analogous to stock options, warrants, or other forms of equity derivatives issued by a company on its own stock. These rights grant the holder the ability to acquire

When Japanese corporations decide to issue new shares, the legal path they must follow varies significantly depending on whether they are classified as "public" or "non-public" companies. While public companies often benefit from a more flexible, board-driven process under the "authorized capital system," non-public

For Japanese public companies, issuing new shares is a fundamental method of raising capital, fueling growth, and pursuing strategic objectives. The Japanese Companies Act (会社法 - Kaisha-hō) provides a framework for these issuances, primarily through what is known as the "authorized capital system" (授権資本制度 - juken shihon seido)

Directors of Japanese corporations operate under a legal framework that imposes significant duties, the breach of which can lead to personal liability for damages suffered by the company. Central to this framework is the "duty of due care," a standard requiring directors to manage the company's

Executive compensation is a cornerstone of corporate governance, serving not only as remuneration for the demanding roles directors undertake but also as a critical mechanism to align management's interests with those of shareholders and the long-term health of the company. In Japan, the Companies Act (会社法 - Kaisha-hō)

The integrity of corporate decision-making hinges on directors acting in the best interests of their company, free from personal conflicts that could sway their judgment. Japanese law, like that of many other jurisdictions, provides a framework to manage situations where a director's personal interests might diverge from those

Effective corporate boards are the linchpin of robust corporate governance globally, tasked with strategic oversight, executive accountability, and safeguarding shareholder interests. In Japan, while many listed companies operate with effective boards, there has been a recognized and periodically highlighted challenge concerning what is sometimes termed "dysfunctional boards" (取締役会の無機能化

Japan's Companies Act (会社法 - Kaisha-hō) establishes a sophisticated framework for corporate regulation, a key feature of which is the differentiated treatment of companies based on their characteristics. Among these, the distinction between "public companies" (公開会社 - kōkai kaisha) and "non-public companies" (非公開会社 -