implication onとは 意味・読み方・使い方

The general CPU determines which determines out of plural kinds of the first advance-notice performance modes different in jackpot expectations, on the basis of the value of winning determination random number corresponding to an implication symbol variation game when it is determined that the first advance-notice performance is executed.例文帳に追加

統括ＣＰＵは、第１予告演出を実行させると判定した場合、示唆対象図柄変動ゲームに対応する当り判定用乱数の値に基づいて、大当り期待度が異なる複数種類の第１予告演出の演出態様のうち何れかを決定する。 - 特許庁

An implication for Japan is that it is important to improve the domestic business environment by simplifying tax procedures, entrepreneurial procedures, etc., in which Japan scored low on the World Bank’s “Doing Business (2012)” and to correct the high-cost business environment.例文帳に追加

我が国へのインプリケーションとしては、高事業コストの是正を行うとともに、世界銀行のDoing Business（2012 年）でも低評価がなされている、納税手続、起業手続等の効率化により国内の事業環境を改善することが重要である。 - 経済産業省

Today, I read your (past) press conference transcript. There, you used the expression "never invite suspicions needlessly" when you were speaking about the Incubator Bank of Japan (Nihon Shinko Ginko). I would like to ask a question from this viewpoint about lawsuits between the Incubator Bank of Japan and several trust banks regarding the problem of them having acquired the same loan claims. Considering that both sides are licensed business operators, it strikes me as a disgraceful occurrence and, behind the scene of those goings-on between licensed operators, it is said that a person who used to be the chairman of one of the lawsuit parties may assume the office of advisor to the Incubator Bank of Japan. My question is whether or not such a turn of events falls under the implication of the saying, "never invite suspicions needlessly."発音を聞く 例文帳に追加

数回、僕は欠席していたので、今日、会見録を拝見しまして大臣がおっしゃっていることで、日本振興銀行に関して、要するに「瓜田に沓を納れず、李下に冠を正さず」というお言葉を使っておられたんですけれども、その観点からお伺いしたいのですけれども、日本振興銀行と複数の信託銀行がローン債権の二重譲渡問題で裁判をやっているわけですね。両方とも免許業種、みっともない話だと思う、免許業種がそういうことをやっているのですけれども、その裁判で戦っている一方の会長をやっていた人が振興銀行の顧問に入るという話があるわけですけれども、こういうことは「瓜田に沓をいれず、李下に冠を正さず」ということに該当しないのかどうかということをお尋ねしたいのでございます。 - 金融庁

I take it that you are asking about the proposed amendment to the Insurance Business Act that has been passed to the current session for continued deliberation. I assume that you are questioning the appropriateness of a mutual aid business of a public interest corporation or the arrangement in which a mutual aid business of a given public interest corporation is to be supervised by the former competent authorities, with an implication that the FSA should be responsible for supervision. Well, the fact is that the respective authorities, having the experience of supervising public interest corporations for a long time, are well-versed with specifics of their operation. On the subject of this Act, I believe that I named several examples the other day, such as the Japan Medical Association, which has always been supervised by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare since the Meiji era, including the years of supervision by its predecessor, the Health and Medical Bureau of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. While circumstances vary from authority to authority, they know very extensively about internal affairs of those corporations and have exercised thorough supervision and, in that sense, have a set of knowledge of their operation and other information accumulated in the course of the work of supervision in the past, which accordingly makes them presumably capable of delivering more fine-tuned supervision than the FSA would be. Since the most important thing is policyholder protection, we believe that, from such a perspective, having the former authorities supervise them is an appropriate way to go. It is also in comprehensive consideration of overall circumstances, including the fact that this exemption of the Act is a provisional step, that we find it appropriate to have the former authorities continue to supervise those corporations.発音を聞く 例文帳に追加

継続審議となっている保険業法の改正案のことだと思いますけれども、公益法人の共済事業あるいは旧主務官庁が監督することになっていますが、それはいかがなものかと、金融庁として監督すべきではないかという質問かと思いますけれども、公益法人というのは、それぞれの官庁が長い間、公益法人の監督をしてきたわけでございますから、その業務に関しては、各監督官庁が事情をよく知っており、この法律については、幾つかこの前も申し上げたと思いますが、例えば、日本医師会は確か明治以来、厚生省、当時の内務省衛生局が、ずっと監督官庁でございまして、各省色々ありますけれども、内部のことを非常によく知っており、各主務官庁がきめ細かい監督を行っていますから、そういった意味で、その業務に関する知見やこれまでの監督について蓄積している情報がございますので、金融庁に比べてより細かな監督を行うことができると考えられまして、契約者保護ということが一番大事ではございますが、そういった観点から（旧主務官庁が監督することが）適当というふうに考えております。そして、この法律の特例は当分の間という措置でございますので、そういったことを総合的に勘案して、引き続き旧主務官庁が監督することが適切だと考えております。 - 金融庁