Defense Team Statement on Osaka District Court Ruling in Lawsuit Accusing City Council Member of Defamation and Discriminatory Remarks Targeting a Private Company
The Osaka District Court delivered a partial victory ruling in a damages lawsuit filed by TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. against Sennan City Council member Shiori Soeda, acknowledging part of her statements as defamation and discriminatory remarks, ordering her to pay 880,000 yen and delete certain videos. The defense team, while evaluating the judgment, deems the lack of consideration for discriminatory intent as unjust and is determined to fight until full rights restoration.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: April 27, 2026 at 19:30
- 🔍 Collected: April 27, 2026 at 11:01
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: April 27, 2026 at 11:16 (15 min after Collected)
April 24, 2026
TryHard Japan Co., Ltd.'s defense team released a statement after the verdict was rendered in the damages lawsuit against Sennan City Council member Shiori Soeda and Sennan City.
[Case No. Reiwa 6 (Wa) No. 975]
(Below is the defense team's statement regarding this judgment.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 24, 2026, the 9th Civil Division of the Osaka District Court (Presiding Judge Ryoji Semori) delivered a partial victory ruling, acknowledging part of Sennan City Council member Shiori Soeda's statements against TryHard Japan Co., Ltd., ordering her to pay 880,000 yen in addition to deleting certain videos.
## Characteristics and Significance of This Lawsuit
This lawsuit seeks to hold Ms. Soeda accountable for tort liability regarding her discriminatory and defamatory expressions. However, unlike typical similar cases, this case has significant characteristics in the following respects:
- It is an attack made by a city council member, a politician, against a private company.
- The attack by the city council member was primarily conducted through social media, inciting citizens to side with groups holding certain political ideologies.
- The content of the attack was racially discriminatory, focusing on ethnic attributes.
Recently, there was an incident where a politician defamed a prefectural assembly member online based on hearsay information via social media, and disclosed personal information such as the member's address on SNS, ultimately leading to the member's suicide. The justification that everything is permissible under the pretext of a politician fulfilling the public's right to know is not acceptable. This case concerns the infringement of personal rights such as the right to honor and the right not to be discriminated against, by a politician using SNS against a corporation, and it is significant in the sense that it puts a stop to human rights violations by politicians using SNS.
Furthermore, in recent times, there is a trend in society to promote xenophobia by advocating for "Japanese First" and spreading fake information. In this case, Ms. Shiori Soeda raised issues about the representative's origin, labeled the company as "Chinese-affiliated," and, through racially discriminatory remarks suggesting that TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. might engage in espionage due to the application of the National Intelligence Law, incited fear and anxiety among recipients, targeting and attempting to exclude the company from the local community. This is nothing but discriminatory incitement. Moreover, by recognizing the right not to be discriminated against for corporations as well as individuals, it supports the economic activities of corporations in society and protects their employees. In this sense, this lawsuit has great social significance in not tolerating discrimination against foreigners and companies amidst the rampant xenophobia in Japan today.
## Evaluation of the Judgment and Future Determination
This judgment is commendable in that it recognized the decline in social evaluation regarding important points of TryHard Japan Co., Ltd.'s defamation claims against Ms. Soeda's discriminatory and defamatory actions, and found illegality in four of them. Also, it is a groundbreaking judgment in that it recognized the deletion of part of the videos themselves.
On the other hand, this judgment evaluated Ms. Soeda's statements as not discriminatory, citing "appropriateness of public expenditure" as her justification. However, it is highly unfair that the judgment denied our claims by stating that her actions were not discriminatory, without making any judgment on her discriminatory motives or effects, and without considering why Ms. Soeda specifically brought up connections with China, such as "Chinese company," when discussing the "appropriateness of public expenditure." This judgment could lead to a situation where any discriminatory remarks are exonerated simply by mentioning "public funds."
Furthermore, the method of judgment merely evaluated Ms. Soeda's statements individually, without considering the discriminatory motives and effects that emerged from the series of actions.
Moreover, it did not even consider the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, indicating a lack of understanding of the importance of international human rights law.
Overall, it is an unjust judgment that misjudged the essence of the case.
We, the defense team, are determined to fight resolutely until the complete restoration of the rights of TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. is achieved.
TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. Defense Team Leader, Lawyer Shun Tanaka
Photographed in front of the Osaka District Court on April 24, 2024 (Plaintiff and defense team members)
[Contact Information (Defense Team)]
Hibiki Law Firm, Osaka Office
Lawyers Kono and Fujita
TEL: 06-62
TryHard Japan Co., Ltd.'s defense team released a statement after the verdict was rendered in the damages lawsuit against Sennan City Council member Shiori Soeda and Sennan City.
[Case No. Reiwa 6 (Wa) No. 975]
(Below is the defense team's statement regarding this judgment.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 24, 2026, the 9th Civil Division of the Osaka District Court (Presiding Judge Ryoji Semori) delivered a partial victory ruling, acknowledging part of Sennan City Council member Shiori Soeda's statements against TryHard Japan Co., Ltd., ordering her to pay 880,000 yen in addition to deleting certain videos.
## Characteristics and Significance of This Lawsuit
This lawsuit seeks to hold Ms. Soeda accountable for tort liability regarding her discriminatory and defamatory expressions. However, unlike typical similar cases, this case has significant characteristics in the following respects:
- It is an attack made by a city council member, a politician, against a private company.
- The attack by the city council member was primarily conducted through social media, inciting citizens to side with groups holding certain political ideologies.
- The content of the attack was racially discriminatory, focusing on ethnic attributes.
Recently, there was an incident where a politician defamed a prefectural assembly member online based on hearsay information via social media, and disclosed personal information such as the member's address on SNS, ultimately leading to the member's suicide. The justification that everything is permissible under the pretext of a politician fulfilling the public's right to know is not acceptable. This case concerns the infringement of personal rights such as the right to honor and the right not to be discriminated against, by a politician using SNS against a corporation, and it is significant in the sense that it puts a stop to human rights violations by politicians using SNS.
Furthermore, in recent times, there is a trend in society to promote xenophobia by advocating for "Japanese First" and spreading fake information. In this case, Ms. Shiori Soeda raised issues about the representative's origin, labeled the company as "Chinese-affiliated," and, through racially discriminatory remarks suggesting that TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. might engage in espionage due to the application of the National Intelligence Law, incited fear and anxiety among recipients, targeting and attempting to exclude the company from the local community. This is nothing but discriminatory incitement. Moreover, by recognizing the right not to be discriminated against for corporations as well as individuals, it supports the economic activities of corporations in society and protects their employees. In this sense, this lawsuit has great social significance in not tolerating discrimination against foreigners and companies amidst the rampant xenophobia in Japan today.
## Evaluation of the Judgment and Future Determination
This judgment is commendable in that it recognized the decline in social evaluation regarding important points of TryHard Japan Co., Ltd.'s defamation claims against Ms. Soeda's discriminatory and defamatory actions, and found illegality in four of them. Also, it is a groundbreaking judgment in that it recognized the deletion of part of the videos themselves.
On the other hand, this judgment evaluated Ms. Soeda's statements as not discriminatory, citing "appropriateness of public expenditure" as her justification. However, it is highly unfair that the judgment denied our claims by stating that her actions were not discriminatory, without making any judgment on her discriminatory motives or effects, and without considering why Ms. Soeda specifically brought up connections with China, such as "Chinese company," when discussing the "appropriateness of public expenditure." This judgment could lead to a situation where any discriminatory remarks are exonerated simply by mentioning "public funds."
Furthermore, the method of judgment merely evaluated Ms. Soeda's statements individually, without considering the discriminatory motives and effects that emerged from the series of actions.
Moreover, it did not even consider the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, indicating a lack of understanding of the importance of international human rights law.
Overall, it is an unjust judgment that misjudged the essence of the case.
We, the defense team, are determined to fight resolutely until the complete restoration of the rights of TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. is achieved.
TryHard Japan Co., Ltd. Defense Team Leader, Lawyer Shun Tanaka
Photographed in front of the Osaka District Court on April 24, 2024 (Plaintiff and defense team members)
[Contact Information (Defense Team)]
Hibiki Law Firm, Osaka Office
Lawyers Kono and Fujita
TEL: 06-62