The Supreme Court handed down its ruling on June 16, 2025 at 3 p.m.

The appeal was dismissed and the unsuccessful judgment became final.

Below are comments from the plaintiffs' representative:

It has been five years since the COVID-19 pandemic. We have received support and encouragement from many people. This has enabled us to do our best. Our legal team has done everything they could. We are truly grateful. Thank you very much.

Sex industry workers were the only ones excluded from relief efforts during this unprecedented pandemic. They were shocked by the way they were treated when it was difficult for them to continue their business following requests to close, and began to question whether this was discrimination. They began taking action based on a personal belief that this was related to their way of life, and received support from many people.

This got many people thinking about discrimination in the sex industry and learning about the current situation in the sex industry and the people who work there.

The Supreme Court's conclusion was terrible. The majority of the Supreme Court judges agreed that not providing COVID-19 subsidies to sex industry businesses was not unconstitutional. However, Chief Justice Mitsuko Miyagawa stuck to her opinion that it was unconstitutional.

This is the result of the current era. However, in five or ten years, Judge Miyagawa's opinion may become the majority opinion. I'm not being sour grapes, but I feel that this result is subject to change.

Whatever I wanted to say during the trial was not conveyed to the four male judges, but was conveyed to the one female judge in full. I think the difference in opinion is a reflection of the values held by each individual, including prejudices that cannot be wiped away no matter how much we explain the facts.

I can fight a constitutional lawsuit on my own. The Supreme Court, the bastion of human rights, should understand. So I started the lawsuit, but I'm disappointed that issues dealing with sexuality will ultimately end up like that.

However, many people in the world have different values than the four Supreme Court justices. This is reflected in a large-scale opinion poll conducted by the legal team. Sex work is work is not just an idea, it is a reality. People work to earn a living every day. It is a business. There are people out there who work to live.

I will continue to do my job diligently. I will work sincerely to ensure that the store's employees and cast members have a safe and comfortable working environment. I will do the job that I have to do. In this way, I will continue to fight against prejudice and discrimination. With the Supreme Court's ruling in hand, I feel that this is the beginning again.

Thank you so much to everyone who supported this trial. I look forward to your continued support!

Although it is late, the notice of arrival of the record has been posted to the court record.

The case is currently pending before the Supreme Court, but the case will be heard by the First Petty Bench.

The judges included are:

Judge Takuya Miyama

Judge Ryosuke Yasunami

Judge Masaaki Oka

Judge Toru Sakai

Judge Mitsuko Miyagawa

Please check the link for my profile and other details. Thank you for your continued support.

On October 5, 2023, there was an appeals court judgment, which follows the ruling of the first instance. We completely lost. 

 The appellate court decision is available here .

 Here are the comments from the representative of plaintiff in response to the appellate court judgment.

 The appellate court decision ignored most of the arguments and evidence that we submitted at the appellate court. It abandoned an argument.

 We will file an appeal soon.

[Summary of dates]

On July 4, 2023, the appeals court's third hearing was held.

The appellant (plaintiff of the first instance) made statements on the 10th brief , the 11th brief , the 12th brief , and the 13th brief (a summary of the briefs is provided at the end).

A brief (1) was presented by the appellee country. In addition, the country stated that it would not make any objections to the briefs submitted by us, including the answers to the explanations we requested.

With the above, the court closed the arguments, acknowledging that both parties' allegations and proofs had been completed.

Judgment will be handed down on the next date. It will be held on October 5th at 15:00 at Courtroom 824.

Please come by all means.

[Summary of documents to be submitted]

10th Preliminary Document : This is a summary of the opinions of 12 scholars who have submitted so far, as well as the fact that all of the published judicial commentaries criticize the original judgment.

11th Preparatory Document : Regarding the brief (1) submitted by the government, it is argued that the purposes and targets of the benefits are different and cannot be said to be similar precedents, and discrimination is justified even if there are similar precedents in the first place. It is a document claiming that it will not be done.

12th Preparatory Document : We have summarized the claims so far regarding the government's narrow discretion in excluding sex business operators from the scope of the sustainability benefits and rent support benefits.

13th Preparatory Document : I additionally asserted that the handling of this case also violates Article 22, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution.

[Summary of argument]

 On April 13, 2023, the appeals court's second hearing was held.

 The appellant (plaintiff of the first instance) presented the 6th, 7th, and 9th briefs (a summary of the briefs is provided at the end).

 In addition, since the 8th Brief had formal deficiencies and had to be replaced, the statement was carried over to the next meeting.

 Respondent State has stated that it does not refute any of the allegations, including the 8th Brief.

 The court requested the appellee country to submit objective evidence regarding cases in which sex industry operators were excluded from past disaster benefit administration, etc., and the country will respond to this by the next date. I decided to do it.

 The next meeting will be held on July 4th at 13:30 in Courtroom 824.

 Please come by all means.

 [Summary of documents to be submitted]

 6th brief: This is an assertion based on the written opinion (Ko 117) of Associate Professor Tsuji, who requested the analysis of public opinion surveys (Ko 115, Ko 116).

 It clarifies that the majority of the people do not share the moral concept of sexuality presented in the original judgment, nor are they opposed to the provision of benefits to sex industry operators.

 7th Preliminary Document: This is a document that summarizes that the logical structure of the original judgment is also wrong from the perspective of the Administrative Organization Law.

 No. 8 Preparatory Document: This is an assertion based on the written opinion jointly signed by Prof. Okitsu and Prof. Horisawa (Ko 121). This is a detailed discussion that the logical structure of the original judgment is contrary to the principle of consistency required in the administration of benefits.

 9th Preliminary Document: This is a document that organizes and summarizes the claims and proofs so far.

On December 8th, at 11:00 a.m., the first oral argument was held at Courtroom 824 of the Tokyo High Court.

Country: Answer

our side:

• appeal letter

• grounds for appeal

• Summary of Grounds for Appeal

• 1st Preparatory Document (About the Sokabe Opinion)

• Statement of Evidence (8) (Ko 59)

• Second brief (value provided by sex-related special sales and significance as a business)

• 3rd Preparatory Document (Extreme damage caused by discriminatory treatment)

• Statement of Evidence (9) (Ko 60-100)

• 4th Preliminary Document (Regarding Prof. Yuki Tamamushi's Opinion)

• Preliminary Paper No. 5 (About Professor Daichi Iwakiri's Opinion)

• Statement of Evidence (10) (Ko 101-109)

• Statement of Evidence (11) (Ko 110-114)

And the evidence described in each statement of evidence was submitted respectively (links are attached to each piece of evidence in the statement of evidence).

After that, therepresentative of the appellant made an opinion statement and theattorney, Kameishi, made an opinion statement .

After the above, the next date was designated as 11:30 am on April 13th (statutory No. 824), and the date has ended.

Please check here for the details of the dates.

We appreciate your continued support.

Kurafan has reached 8 million yen! And in a little while we will have 1000 supporters!

Thank you for the support from many people. We will continue to ask for your support. Support from many people will help. Thank you very much.

We have started additional crowdfunding.

The first instance was unsuccessful and was defeated. I'm really grateful for your support.

We are thinking of submitting a new investigation and a written opinion focusing on the judgment of the first-instance judgment in order to win the reversal in the appeal trial.

We would appreciate your support.

TBD

June 30th (Thursday) 15: 00-The judgment will be handed down at the Tokyo District Court, Court No. 419.

Hearing numbered tickets will be distributed from 14:30 in front of the 419 court on the day. The number of distributions is planned to be around 30.

Since there is a TV shoot before the court, there is a possibility that the back view will be depressed.