A party hearing of the plaintiff was conducted.

The witnesses requested by the defendant, immigration control officer A (the employee claimed by the plaintiff as the person who committed the assault in this lawsuit) and the guard officer (the person in charge on the day of the incident who was present at the scene from the middle of the incident) were questioned as witnesses. each was carried out.

The plaintiff's spouse witness, who was the witness requested by the plaintiff, was then conducted.

・The defendant is (1) immigration control officer A (the immigration officer who mainly assaulted the plaintiff in this case), (2) the person in charge of this case guard (the person in charge who decided each disposition of the plaintiff in this case and was present at the scene from the middle) I applied for the cross-examination of a witness.

・The plaintiff applied for the interrogation of (1) the plaintiff himself, (2) the plaintiff's spouse, (3) immigration control officer A, and (4) the person in charge of the prison guard.

・As a result of the above, the court adopted both types of interrogation, and the interrogation schedule was adjusted according to the date of the interrogation (it was necessary to secure a courtroom with appropriate space and equipment, and to adjust the schedule of the Turkish interpreter, etc.). Therefore, no decision was reached in this oral argument.)

● Regarding the submission of documents by the parties ・ The plaintiff submitted the plaintiff's 8th brief and made a statement.
-The defendant submitted the defendant's brief (9) and made a statement.

● About the schedule until the next time ・ Since the court asked the contents of the person who is planning to cross-examine both parties, the plaintiff side should request the plaintiff himself, the plaintiff's wife, and the plaintiff's doctor, although it is not confirmed. I answered that I was considering. On the other hand, the defendant replied that he was considering requesting A's boss who decided to quarantine the plaintiff on the day of the case, in addition to the immigration officer named "A" in the proceedings. ..
-On the premise of the above, the judge instructed both parties to abdicate and apply for a personal identification by July 22 and to submit a statement by July 29.

It was confirmed that the next oral argument will be held at Tokyo District Court No. 415 from 11:30 on August 5.

● Regarding the submission of documents by the parties ・ The plaintiff submitted the plaintiff's 7th brief and made a statement.
-The defendant submitted the defendant's brief (8) and made a statement.

● Regarding the arrangement of the judges' allegations ・ The court side expressed the recognition that the trial of this trial was finalized (with the reservation that it does not mean that additional allegations are not allowed).
・ Based on the above recognition, we instructed both parties to prepare to respond to future proof policies (application for personal identification, etc.) in addition to submitting counter-arguments to the documents submitted in this trial. ..

It was confirmed that the next oral argument will be held at Tokyo District Court No. 415 from 11:30 on May 13 .

● About the plaintiff's document submission ・ The plaintiff side submitted and stated the plaintiff's petition for change of action (extending the request) and the plaintiff's sixth brief.
・ The defendant verbally responded to dismiss the changed claim, and replied that the plea would be in writing by the next time.

● Regarding the claim arrangement table ・ The court requested that the plaintiff specify the beginning of the use of the warning tool that the plaintiff claims is illegal by the playback time of the video on the evidence. , Exercise of tangible force / Isolation measures / Failure of necessary measures, and on the premise that the reasons for illegal use of tangible force are further subdivided, which act is illegal and why is it legal? We requested that the points be added to the rearrangement table and that the allegations were made based on this rearrangement table.

● Regarding the illegality of the quarantine measures ・ The court side has insufficiently asserted why the immigration bureau continued the quarantine measures for 5 days, so the defendant country should be replenished with that point. Requested

● Regarding the plaintiff's allegation that he neglected the necessary measures ・ If the plaintiff's allegation that he neglected the necessary measures is meant to be illegal in omission, the national side (immigration side) should take it. He clarified the view that there is a way to clarify the content of the act that was there and the circumstances that are the basis for taking the act.
・ In addition, the plaintiffs were requested to organize and clarify in writing the contents of the actions to be taken and the circumstances on which they are based.

● Regarding the use of tangible power ・ The court stated that the allegations were exhausted by both parties, and proved the parts not shown in the video (the parts where the behaviors of each other are in conflict). I requested that the schedule be clarified one after another.

It was decided that the next oral argument will be held from 11:40 on March 17, 2022, and the next oral argument will be held from 11:30 on May 13, 2022 at the Tokyo District Court No. 415 .

● Regarding the submission of the defendant's briefs ・ The defendant submitted the brief 7 ・ The plaintiff argued against the defendant because there was no counterargument to the part of the defendant's brief 7 that discussed the absence of the assault of the plaintiff's fifth brief. I confirmed that I wouldn't do it.
-In response, the Defendant replied that it was a recognition that the Defendant's allegations were exhausted by the contents of this document.

● Plaintiff's allegations regarding Exhibit Otsu No. 10 ・ Whether or not to maintain this allegation because the court made an allegation in the plaintiff's 5th brief that it seemed that Exhibit Otsu No. 10 was misread ( There was a confirmation about (correct).
・ The plaintiff replied that the points pointed out would be scrutinized and that the correction of the allegations would be clarified by the next time.

● About the allegation arrangement table ・ Since the court will prepare the form of the arrangement table for the plaintiff side in order to arrange the allegation, describe the correspondence between the playback time of the video submitted as evidence and the allegation in the blank. I was instructed to do so.

Based on the above, the court will respond to the plaintiffs by (1) answering the pros and cons of correcting the allegations regarding Exhibit Otsu No. 10, (2) submitting a document to extend the claim, and (3) supplementing the allegations rearranging table until January 17 (Monday). Was requested to submit to.

It was decided that the next oral argument will be held at the Tokyo District Court No. 415 from 11:30 on January 21, 2022 (Friday).

● The plaintiff submits a document
・ The plaintiff submits a counter-argument to the defendant's alleged document (plaintiff's fifth brief)
・ On the other hand, the document regarding the expansion of the claim amount has not been prepared by the doctor in charge. Postponed to one after another because of

 ● Court proceedings command
・ Instruct the defendant to submit a counter-argument to the plaintiff's fifth brief

 [Schedule until next time]
 The defendant has decided that the next oral argument to submit a new counter-argument will be held at the Tokyo District Court No. 415 from 10:30 am on November 26, 2021.

【Documents to be submitted】

・ Defendant (country) side: Defendant brief 6, Exhibit Otsu No. 28,29

[Interaction in court]

● Counterargument to the plaintiff ・ Request for supplementation of allegations ・ The court confirms that the defendant's counterargument to the plaintiff's allegations has been completed, and then re-issues the defendant's briefs 4, 5 and 6 to the plaintiff. I urged him to refute.
・ Regarding the plaintiff's counterargument document requested to be submitted, the court clarifies which of the immigration officials' responses alleged by the plaintiff in the complaint, etc., is regarded as an illegal act and which is regarded as the background of the illegal act. Requested to include the content to be done.

● Replenishment of damages ・ Confirmation of plans to expand claims ・ Plaintiffs stated on the previous oral argument date that the plaintiffs would replenish allegations of damages and increase claims. I confirmed to the side when it was planned. In response, the plaintiff replied that it would be held until the next oral argument date.

[Schedule until next time]
The plaintiffs will submit a new counter-argument document and a document regarding the increase in the amount billed by August 31, 2021.

It was decided that the next oral argument will be held in Court No. 415 of the Tokyo District Court from 11:00 am on September 17, 2021.

【Documents to be submitted】

-Plaintiff (Mr. Deniz): 4th brief, Exhibits A14, 15-Defendant (country) side: Defendant brief 4, Defendant brief 5, Exhibit Otsu 25-27

[Interaction in court]

● Confirmation of the allegation schedule from the court When the court confirmed to the defendant (country) side whether the counterargument to the plaintiff side was completed by the defendant's brief 4 and the defendant's brief 5, the counterargument to the plaintiff's 4th brief was Since it has not been completed, there was a reply that a counter-argument document will be added by the next time.

● Supplementary information on the plaintiff's alleged schedule ・ Since the court confirmed whether there was any supplementary information on the future schedule, the plaintiff side confirmed that the plaintiff side would consult a medical institution after filing the complaint, and that there would be a great deal of mental distress such as hospitalization. He added that due to the underlying events, he plans to increase the amount billed as necessary and supplement the claims regarding damage.

[Schedule until next time]
Defendants will submit a new counter-argument by July 2, 2021

It was decided that the next oral argument will be held at Tokyo District Court No. 415 from 1:30 pm on July 9, 2021.