「but should be」に関連した英語例文の一覧と使い方(15ページ目) - Weblio英語例文検索

From around noon today, I am scheduled to receive a briefing from the FSA staff on the double loan problem. Numerous questions have been asked about the double loan problem at the Budget Committee and I have replied to some of them. Forgive me for mentioning this over and over again, but basically, the FSA is responsible for inspecting and supervising private financial institutions. In principle, the financial source of private financial institutions is deposits entrusted by individuals - savings in the case of Japan Post Bank - and those funds must be repaid with interest in principle. Therefore, we will use the Act on Special Measures for Strengthening Financial Functions to increase capital. Under the Act on Special Measures for Strengthening Financial Functions, we will not pursue the responsibility of managers nor will we demand the setting of efficiency targets. As this is a once-in-a-millennium tsunami, the government needs to do its utmost to appropriately deal with it, rather than pursuing the responsibility of managers. In that sense, financial institutions should take appropriate actions in the Tohoku region. 例文帳に追加

今日昼から、その二重ローンの話を、実は事務局から話を受けるようになっていますが、これは何度も私が申し上げましたように、二重ローンの問題、二重債務の問題、これは何回も予算委員会で質問をいただきまして、私も答弁させていただきましたが、繰り返しになって恐縮ですけれども、金融庁といたしましては、基本的に民間金融機関の検査・監督でございまして、民間金融機関というのは、原則としてお人様から預かった預金が原資でございまして、あるいは、ゆうちょ銀行であれば貯金でございますが、これに当然一定の利子をつけてお返しするというのが原理・原則でございますから、できるだけ、この金融機能強化法によって自己資本を増すと。そのために、経営者の努力の瑕疵は問わないと、あるいは色々な効率性・能率性の努力目標は求めないということが金融機能強化法でございますが、これは千年に一遍の津波でございますから、経営者の責任というよりも、国家を挙げてきちっと対処することが必要でございます。私はそういった意味で、きちっと金融機関が東北地方は対処すべきだというふうに思っています。 - 金融庁

Osaka High Court Judgment, February 27, 1997, p.131 of Hanrei Jiho vol. 1624 "The Respondent Company does not operate the Device by itself, but repeatedly conducts a certain lease business which provides commercially used karaoke devices to users which are highly likely to infringe the representation and performance rights of musical works managed by the Appellant [omitted]. If the user uses this Device for providing karaoke music to their customers without being licensed by the Appellant, the user was aware that it violates the representation and performance rights of musical works managed by the Appellant. Alternatively, if he/she was not aware of it, they should have been, as it would be easy for such user to become aware of it. In this particular case, the Respondent Company was aware of the fact that it continued to provide customers with karaoke services by using the Device without holding any license to do so. The Respondent Company continued and renewed the Lease Agreement and provided the Device, silently accepting Therefore, the Respondent acted jointly with Appellants Noriko and Takashi in the aforementioned infringement of copyrights." 例文帳に追加

大阪高裁平成９年２月２７日判決・判時１６２４号１３１頁「控訴人会社は、自ら本件装置を操作するものではないが、被控訴人が管理する音楽著作物の上映権及び演奏権を侵害するおそれの極めて高い、業務用カラオケ装置をユーザーに提供することを内容とする、リース業務を日常的に反復継続する者として、･･･本件装置のユーザーが被控訴人の許諾を得ないまま本件装置をカラオケ伴奏による客の歌唱に使用すれば、被控訴人が管理する音楽著作物の上映権及び演奏権を侵害することになることを知っていたか、仮に知らなかったとしても容易に知り得たのであるから、これを知るべきであったというべきである。しかるところ、控訴人会社は、･･･許諾を得ないまま本件店舗において本件装置を使用して客に歌唱させていることを認識しながら、右著作権侵害の結果を認容しつつ、本件リース契約を継続、更改して本件装置を提供し、控訴人則子及び同隆による前示本件著作権侵害行為に加担したというべきである。」 - 経済産業省

This means that we are struggling hard to make ends meet and, as everyone well realizes, international meetings have become extremely important in the world of finance since the Lehman crisis, because it is now indeed a very critical global issue to decide how to harmonize on an international scale a given country's domestic economic trends or the financial condition, or economic condition, that it has traditionally been situated in. Therefore, what has to be done on an international scale must be done properly in the form of policy coordination or as G20 initiatives, as otherwise no effect could be expected in an era of increasing globalization in finance or the economy that we live in now, and each country is equally struggling to achieve that end, which explains why there are so many international meetings. That is, as you see, the situation we have now, and I also happened to hear just yesterday in connection with this subject that our Office of International Affairs is in serious shortage of labor, a fact that stands in contrast to such critical importance of the FSA, to which a mere 22 billion yen is given as its budget, and the extremely significant role that financial policies play in an economy. As I have just said, though, now is a very important and delicate period of time both internationally and domestically and we are accordingly charged with a weighty responsibility. Seeing as the FSA is a public office with labor costs representing its main spending category, I did emphatically asked that attention should be paid to that point and, actually, similar comments were also made by the National Police Agency and the Ministry of Justice, both of them being ministries with a hefty payroll as well. In the case of the FSA, it is not really my particular intention to make a case to represent an interest of the FSA, but the fact still remains that it is in charge of a very important field. 例文帳に追加

ということで非常に苦労しておりますし、そういった皆様方もよくお分かりのように、金融というのはリーマン・ショック以来、国際的な会議というのは非常に重要でございまして、国内の景気の動向、あるいはその国が置かれた伝統的な金融の状態、あるいは経済の状態、それを国際的にどうハーモナイズするかということが非常に世界的な大事な問題でございまして、国際でやるべきところはきちっと協調政策、Ｇ20でやっていかねば、なかなかこういった金融のグローバル化、あるいは経済のグローバル化の時代に効果がございませんから、その辺を非常に苦労を各国やっておられるわけでございますから、国際会議というのは実は非常に多いのでございますし、ご存じ、その中で国際室の昨日もたまたま話を聞きますと、非常に国際室の人手が足らないという話を聞きまして、そういった非常に大事な金融庁、予算は220億で少ないのですけれども、極めて経済の中で果たす金融政策は大事でございまして、それが今も申し上げましたけれども、国際的にも国内的にも非常に大事な難しい時期でもございまして、それゆえに責任が重たいわけでございますが、そういった中で、なかなか人件費を主とした役所でございますから、そのことはぜひ考慮していただきたいということをこれは実は警察庁も法務省もそういうことを申されまして、これも人件費が多い省ですから、特に金融庁の場合は何も私は省益を代表して言う気はございませんが、現実にこれは非常に大事な分野でございます。 - 金融庁

(2) Article 7, Article 9(1) and Article 10(1) shall apply mutatis mutandis to a report submitted under the preceding paragraph (hereinafter referred to as a "Share Buyback Report"), and Article 22 shall apply mutatis mutandis to cases where a Share Buyback Report contains any fake statement on important matters or lacks a statement an important matters that should be stated or on a material fact that is necessary for avoiding misunderstanding. In this case, the part "a statement set forth in Article 5(1) or in other documents required under Article 5(6), or there occurs any other circumstance provided for by a Cabinet Office Ordinance as that which requires amendment of such statement or such other documents for the public interest or protection of investors, during the period on or after the day when the notification was made under Article 4(1) or (2) but before the day when the notification is to take effect" and the terms "the person making the notification" and "an amendment" in Article 7 shall be deemed to be replaced with "a Share Buyback Report (meaning report to be submitted under Article 24-6(1); hereinafter the same shall apply in this Article, Article 9(1), Article 10(1) and Article 22), or there occurs any other circumstance provided for by a Cabinet Office Ordinance as that which requires amendment of a Share Buyback Report for the public interest or protection of investors," "the person submitting the Share Buyback Report" and "an amendment report," respectively; the terms "the person submitting them" and "an amendment" in Article 9(1) shall be deemed to be replaced with "the person submitting the Share Buyback Report" and "an amendment report," respectively; the terms "the person submitting the Securities Registration Statement" and "to submit an amendment and may, when he/she finds it necessary, order the suspension of the effect of the notification made under Article 4(1) or (2)" in Article 10(1) shall be deemed to be replaced with "the person submitting the Share Buyback Report" and "to submit an amendment report," respectively; the term "persons specified in Article 21(1)(i) and (iii)" and the part "persons who have acquired the Securities issued by the person submitting the Securities Registration Statement not through Public Offering or Secondary Distribution" in Article 22(1) shall be deemed to be replaced with "person who, at the time of submission of the Share Buyback Report, is an Officer of the company having submitted the Share Buyback Report" and "persons who have acquired the Securities issued by the person submitting the Share Buyback Report," respectively; the terms "Article 21(2)(i) and (ii)" and "the preceding paragraph" in Article 22(2) shall be deemed to be replaced with "Article 21(2)(i)" and "the preceding paragraph as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 24-6(2)," respectively. 例文帳に追加

２　第七条、第九条第一項及び第十条第一項の規定は前項に規定する報告書（以下「自己株券買付状況報告書」という。）について、第二十二条の規定は自己株券買付状況報告書のうちに重要な事項について虚偽の記載があり、又は記載すべき重要な事項若しくは誤解を生じさせないために必要な重要な事実の記載が欠けている場合について、それぞれ準用する。この場合において、第七条中「第四条第一項又は第二項の規定による届出の日以後当該届出がその効力を生ずることとなる日前において、第五条第一項及び第六項の規定による届出書類」とあるのは「自己株券買付状況報告書（第二十四条の六第一項に規定する報告書をいう。以下この条、第九条第一項、第十条第一項及び第二十二条において同じ。）」と、「届出者」とあるのは「自己株券買付状況報告書の提出者」と、「訂正届出書」とあるのは「訂正報告書」と、第九条第一項中「届出者」とあるのは「自己株券買付状況報告書の提出者」と、「訂正届出書」とあるのは「訂正報告書」と、第十条第一項中「届出者」とあるのは「自己株券買付状況報告書の提出者」と、「訂正届出書の提出を命じ、必要があると認めるときは、第四条第一項又は第二項の規定による届出の効力の停止」とあるのは「訂正報告書の提出」と、第二十二条第一項中「第二十一条第一項第一号及び第三号に掲げる者」とあるのは「当該自己株券買付状況報告書を提出した会社のその提出の時における役員」と、「有価証券届出書の届出者が発行者である有価証券を募集又は売出しによらないで取得した者」とあるのは「自己株券買付状況報告書の提出者が発行者である有価証券を取得した者」と、同条第二項中「第二十一条第二項第一号及び第二号」とあるのは「第二十一条第二項第一号」と、「前項」とあるのは「第二十四条の六第二項において準用する前項」と読み替えるものとする。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Simultaneously, how should insurance be regulated and supervised from now on? I believe insurance in China is not as advanced as in Japan yet. But then again, Japan’s insurance industry has experienced falling stock prices and interest rates over the past decade and suffered a long period of winter-like hardship: the insurance sector, where they have something called “expense profits”, “interest gain” and “mortality profits”, the interest gain was so squeezed that at one point, negative carry was more than 1 trillion yen. In the United States, the federal government will be establishing a division in charge of insurance for the first time within the federal government organization under the financial reform legislation. As you know, basic supervision of insurance in the United States is conducted on a state-by-state basis. Despite the fact that AIU—the world’s biggest private insurance company—was effectively nationalized in the United States, the insurance industry has been a bit of a blind spot in that any attempts in the past to negotiate with the central government often resulted in being told that it was a matter for the state government. The United States is a federal republic comprised of states, so in that sense, insurance varies from state to state in tax and other aspects. 例文帳に追加

しかし、同時にそれでは今から保険の行政に関してどういう点をやっているのか。まだ日本ほど保険が進んでいるとは思っておりませんけれども、しかし同時に、日本の保険業界もご存じのように大変ここ10年間株価は下がる、あるいは金利が下がるということで、費差益・利差益・死差益というのが保険業にはございますが、本当に利差益が少なくて大変一時は末端逆ざやが1兆円余の保険業界でもあるというような冬の時代が長く続きましたけれども、多くのかなりの、我々が27年前に通ったころは、日本の名前がついた生命保険会社法だったのですけれども、今色々な外資からも変わったところもありますので、そんなことを含めて今度アメリカでも保険ということが、ご存じのようにアメリカは保険の基本的監督は州単位なんですよ、アメリカの政府は。州単位で保険をやっていまして、連邦政府というのは、金融規制改革法で初めて連邦政府の中に保険担当の部署をつくるんですよ、今度初めて。しかしながら、AIUなんていう世界で一番大きな民間保険会社をアメリカは実質国営化しましたけれども、そこら辺で保険業界というのはちょっと穴と言ったらおかしいけれども、中央政府と今まで交渉しましても、これは中央政府の話だということもしばしばございまして、そういった意味で保険というのはなかなか、アメリカは合衆国ですから、税金なんかも州によって違いますね。 - 金融庁