「had time」に関連した英語例文の一覧と使い方(76ページ目) - Weblio英語例文検索

They claim that (1) it is difficult to reduce money supply volume to an appropriate level in a short time span, for international excessive liquidity is at an extremely high level because of easy-money policies which had been maintained for many years (Figure 1.1.15), (2)funds generated by significant current account surpluses in East Asian countries and regions such as China, as well as new oil money created by crude oil prices which have soared and remained at a high level, will flow back into the US further because of the raising of interest rates in the US, and (3) it is difficult for different countries to introduce uniform tight policies because of differences in economic cycles, although for tightening the money market, it is effective for fund suppliers of respective nations to carry out tight policies in harmonization.例文帳に追加

その理由としては、①これまでの長年にわたる金融緩和政策で国際的な過剰流動性が極めて高い水準にあることから短期的には資金供給量が適正水準まで低下することは難しいこと（第1-1-15図）、②中国等の東アジア諸国・地域の大幅な経常収支黒字による資金や、原油価格の高騰・高止まりにより生じた新たなオイルマネーが米国金利引上げにより更に米国へ還流すること、③金融引締めを行うためには世界の資金供給源が協調して金融引締めを行うことが有効だが、景気サイクルの違う各国が協調して均一的な引締めを行うことは難しい、ということが指摘されている。 - 経済産業省

Uji-shi planned to develop a medical examination system for babies by utilizing data in the basic resident register of which Uji-City was in charge. For this purpose, the development business was consigned by Uji-City to a private company, which further consigned the same to another company all the way down. Then, a part-time employee of the consignee (three-step consignments between Uji-City) made unauthorized copies of the data in the basic resident register and sold them to name-list distributors, who further resold them to other distributors. With respect to this matter, three inhabitants in Uji-City claimed that they had suffered mental damage due to the aforementioned leakage of data and filed an action against Uji-City with the Kyoto District Court, demanding compensation of damages for mental sufferings and attorney's fee. The Court finally ruled that Uji-City is liable for invasion of privacy rights and ordered Uji-City to pay 15,000 yen (10,000 yen as compensation for mental sufferings and 5,000 yen as attorney's fee) for each person. 例文帳に追加

宇治市がその管理に係る住民基本台帳のデータを使用して乳幼児検診システムを開発することを企図し、その開発業務を民間業者に委託したところ、再々委託先のアルバイトの従業員が上記データを不正にコピーしてこれを名簿販売業者に販売し、同業者が更に上記データを他に販売するなどをしたことに関して、宇治市の住民３人が、上記データの流出により精神的苦痛を被ったと主張して、宇治市に対し、損害賠償金（慰謝料及び弁護士費用）の支払を求めた事案において、プライバシー権侵害に基づく宇治市の不法行為責任を認め、損害賠償として１人当たり１万5000円（慰謝料１万円及び弁護士費用５０００円）の支払を命じた。 - 経済産業省

When making comparisons between two widely separated points in time, attention needs to be paid to changes in demographic structure and the number of persons in work by size of employer. Nevertheless, it is worth noting a number of points in relation to factors such as the ratio of employer to employee incomes35) and the risk aversion analyzed below. These are that the increase in the proportion of people becoming self-employed proprietors is lower at relatively larger enterprises, that the difference between younger and middle-aged workers and older workers at enterprises with 100 or more workers was not as pronounced in 1987 as the difference between younger and middle-aged workers and older workers at enterprises with 99 or fewer workers, and that the proportion of young and middle-aged workers at enterprises with 10~99 workers was lower in 2002 and had come to resemble the trend regarding former employees of enterprises with 100 or more workers.例文帳に追加

間隔が長期に開いた二時点間の比較を行う上では人口構成や規模別就業者数の変化に注意を払う必要が有るが、企業規模が相対的に大きいほど自営業主へ転職する者に占める割合は低いことや、1987年では従業者100人以上の企業規模における若・中年者と高齢者との差は、99人以下の企業規模における若・中年者と高齢者ほどの顕著なものではなかったこと、2002年には10人以上99人以下規模企業の若・中年転職者の占める割合が低下し100人以上の企業規模出身者と傾向が似たことは、事業者対被雇用者の収入比率35や次に分析するリスク回避志向等との関係で注目に値するのである。 - 経済産業省

Moreover, NISA launched the Coordination Committee on Technical Information in JNES, in order to reinforce the measures for aged plants, and in order to share domestic and overseas technical information for effective utilization among the industrial world, academic and governmental institutions. Furthermore, JNES established an ad-hoc committee that consists of NISA, universities, research organizations, electric utilities, nuclear plant manufacturers, plant engineering companies, etc. under the Atomic Energy Society of Japan. From July 2004 through March 2005, the ad-hoc committee had prepared a road map on measures for aging management and long life-time safe operation of light water reactors.例文帳に追加

原子力安全・保安院は、高経年化プラントへの対応を充実強化するために、産業界、学会、政府機関の間で、国内外の技術情報を共有し、有効に活用するために原子力安全基盤機構の中に技術情報調整委員会を発足させ、また、日本原子力学会の下に、原子力安全・保安院、原子力安全基盤機構、大学、研究機関、電力事業者、原子力プラントメーカー、エンジニアリング会社等が参加した特別委員会を設置して、2004年7月から、2005年3月にかけて高経年化対策及び軽水炉の長寿命安全運転に対するロードマップを整備した。 - 経済産業省

Article 49 With regard to Transferred Specified Electrical Appliances and Materials pertaining to a product type for which approval under Article 18 or Article 23, paragraph (1) of the Old Electrical Appliance and Material Control Act or confirmation under Article 23-2, paragraph (1) of the Old Electrical Appliance and Material Control Act had been obtained at the time of enforcement of Article 10, or with regard to Class-B Electrical Appliances and Materials as set forth in Article 2, paragraph (2) of the Old Electrical Appliance and Material Control Act with structures pertaining to a notification under Article 26-2, paragraph (1) or Article 26-3, paragraph (1) of the Old Electrical Appliance and Material Control Act which fall into the category of Electrical Appliances and Materials set forth in Article 2, paragraph (1) of the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety Act, labeling under Article 25, paragraph (1) or Article 26-6, paragraph (1) may be affixed during the one year from the day of enforcement of Article 10 (with regard to those specified by Cabinet Order as Transferred Electrical Appliances and Materials that require a considerable period of time for the repair or alteration of manufacturing equipment accompanied with the change of labeling, the period specified by Cabinet Order for the relevant Transferred Electrical Appliances and Materials within a limit not exceeding three years from the day of the enforcement of Article 10), notwithstanding the provisions of Article 10, paragraph (2) of the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety Act. 例文帳に追加

第四十九条　第十条の規定の施行の際現に旧電気用品取締法第十八条若しくは第二十三条第一項の認可若しくは旧電気用品取締法第二十三条の二第一項の確認を受けている型式に係る移行特定電気用品又は旧電気用品取締法第二十六条の二第一項若しくは第二十六条の三第一項の規定による届出に係る構造の旧電気用品取締法第二条第二項の乙種電気用品であって電気用品安全法第二条第一項の電気用品であるものについては、電気用品安全法第十条第二項の規定にかかわらず、第十条の規定の施行の日から起算して一年間（表示の変更に伴う製造設備の修理又は改造に相当の期間を要する移行電気用品として政令で定めるものにあっては、第十条の規定の施行の日から起算して三年を超えない範囲内において移行電気用品ごとに政令で定める期間）は、旧電気用品取締法第二十五条第一項又は第二十六条の六第一項の規定の例による表示を付することができる。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

However, banks based on unconventional business models such as Seven Bank and Sony Bank were founded at the same time as the establishment of the Incubator Bank of Japan, and I have received a report from the administrative authority that it was not particularly premature to provide them with a license given that Seven Bank and Sony Bank are still functioning properly to this day. That said, Mr. Takenaka was Minister of State and a Diet member at the time; given that Mr. Kimura served as a consultant to FSA and issued a license while Mr. Takenaka served as Minister, he cannot evade moral responsibility, as I stated last week. As the Chief Cabinet Secretary had mentioned that further inquiries should be conducted by the Minister, Senior Vice Minister, and Parliamentary Secretary of the FSA, we will heed this very seriously and tackle this issue accordingly. 例文帳に追加

ただし、設立の時は、この前申し上げましたように、セブン銀行だとかソニー銀行だという普通のビジネスモデルとは違う銀行が同じ時期に、同時に設立されましたし、今もセブン銀行、ソニー銀行というのは、きちっと機能を生かしておりますので、そこのところは特別早かったということはないというようなことは、報告を事務当局から受けていますけれども、私がこの前言いましたように、私は竹中平蔵さんというのは（当時の）国務大臣でございまして、なおかつ国会議員もしておられたわけでございますから、なおかつ自分のときに金融庁の顧問、そして自分が大臣のときに免許を出したわけでございますから、道義的責任は免れないということをこの前私は申し上げましたが、そのことはきちっと認識をいたしておりますし、また官房長官も、（再検証は）この（金融庁の）政務三役にというような発言があったようでございますが、そのことも大変重たく視野に入れつつ、きちっと今後とも対処していきたいというふうに思っております。 - 金融庁

(1) Subject to this section and to section 57, the Court may, on application by a person aggrieved, order a trade mark to be removed from the Register in respect of any of the goods or services in respect of which it is registered on the ground . (a) that the trade mark was registered without an intention in good faith, on the part of the applicant for registration or, if it was registered under subsection (1) of section 26, on the part of the body corporate or registered user concerned, to use the trade mark in relation to those goods or services and that there has in fact been no use in good faith of the trade mark in relation to those goods or services by the registered proprietor or registered user of the trade mark for the time being up to the date one month before the date of the application; or (b) that up to one month before the date of the application a continuous period of not less than three years had elapsed during which the trade mark was a registered trade mark and during which there was no use in good faith of the trade mark in relation to those goods or services by the registered proprietor or registered user of the trade mark for the time being. [Am. Act A881]例文帳に追加

(1) 本条及び第57条に従うことを条件として，裁判所は，不服を有する者の申請により，次の何れかを理由として，ある登録商標をその登録に係る商品又はサービスの何れかに関して登録簿から抹消すべき旨の命令を発することができる。 (a) 当該商標が，その登録出願人の側において，又は第26条(1)に基づく登録の場合は，関係の一般法人若しくは登録使用者の側において，それらの商品又はサービスに関して当該商標を使用する善意の意図がないにも拘らず登録され，かつ，当該商標の登録所有者又は登録使用者が，当該申請の日の1月前までに，それらの商品又はサービスに関して当該商標の善意の使用を実際に行っていないこと，又は (b) 申請の日の1月前に至るまで連続して3年以上，当該商標が登録されているにも拘らず当該商標の登録所有者又は登録使用者がそれらの商品又はサービスに関して当該商標の善意の使用を行っていないこと［法律A881による改正］ - 特許庁

(2) With regard to the application of the provision of Article 70, paragraph (6), as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 165-7, paragraph (4) (including the cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 165-12), Article 88, paragraph (6), as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 165-17, paragraph (4) (including the cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 165-20), or Article 165-24, paragraph (6) in the case where a merger is to be made as set forth in paragraph (1) in the preceding Article, in these provisions, the term "insurance contracts under which the right to Insurance Claims, etc., had already arisen at the Time of Public Notice under the provision of that paragraph (limited to those contracts that would be terminated with payment pertaining to said right to Insurance Claims, etc.)" shall be deemed to be replaced with "insurance contracts prescribed in Article 250, paragraph (3), as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 254, paragraph (2)," the term "one fifth" shall be deemed to be replaced with "one tenth," the term "Right to Insurance Claims, etc." shall be deemed to be replaced with "insurance claims pertaining to the Specified Contracts prescribed in Article 250, paragraph (3), as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 254, paragraph (2), and any other rights specified by a Cabinet Order." 例文帳に追加

２　前条第一項の合併をする場合における第百六十五条の七第四項（第百六十五条の十二において準用する場合を含む。）において準用する第七十条第六項、第百六十五条の十七第四項（第百六十五条の二十において準用する場合を含む。）において準用する第八十八条第六項又は第百六十五条の二十四第六項の規定の適用については、これらの規定中「同項の規定による公告の時において既に保険金請求権等が生じている保険契約（当該保険金請求権等に係る支払により消滅することとなるものに限る。）」とあるのは「第二百五十四条第二項において準用する第二百五十条第三項に規定する特定契約」と、「五分の一」とあるのは「十分の一」と、「保険金請求権等」とあるのは「第二百五十四条第二項において準用する第二百五十条第三項に規定する特定契約に係る保険金請求権その他の政令で定める権利」とする。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(c) whose license under Article 3, paragraph (1) was rescinded pursuant to the provision of Article 133 or 134, whose license under Article 185, paragraph (1) was canceled pursuant to the provision of Article 205 or 206, whose license under Article 219, paragraph (1) was canceled pursuant to the provision of Article 231 or 232, whose registration under Article 272, paragraph (1) was canceled pursuant to the provision of Article 272-26, paragraph (1) or Article 272-27 or whose registration under Article 276 or 286 was canceled pursuant to the provision of Article 307, paragraph (1), or against whom a similar type of license or registration under the relevant provision of a foreign law or regulation equivalent to this Act (including any permission or other administrative disposition similar to such license or registration) was canceled in the foreign state concerned, and who had been a director, executive officer, accounting advisor or company auditor, or the Representative Person in Japan (including any similar post) of the company at any time during the 30 (thirty) days prior to the date of the cancellation, without five years having elapsed since the date of such cancellation; 例文帳に追加

ハ　第百三十三条若しくは第百三十四条の規定により第三条第一項の免許を取り消され、第二百五条若しくは第二百六条の規定により第百八十五条第一項の免許を取り消され、第二百三十一条若しくは第二百三十二条の規定により第二百十九条第一項の免許を取り消され、第二百七十二条の二十六第一項若しくは第二百七十二条の二十七の規定により第二百七十二条第一項の登録を取り消され、若しくは第三百七条第一項の規定により第二百七十六条若しくは第二百八十六条の登録を取り消された場合又はこの法律に相当する外国の法令の規定により当該外国において受けている同種類の免許若しくは登録（当該免許又は登録に類する許可その他の行政処分を含む。）を取り消された場合において、その取消しの日前三十日以内にその会社の取締役、執行役、会計参与若しくは監査役又は日本における代表者であった者（これらに類する役職にあった者を含む。）でその取消しの日から五年を経過しない者 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 21-2 (1) If any of the documents specified in the items of Article 25(1) (excluding Article 25(1)(v) and (ix)) (hereinafter referred to as the "Documents" in this Article) contains any fake statement on important matters or lacks a statement on important matters that should be stated or on a material fact that is necessary for avoiding misunderstanding, the person who submitted the document shall be held liable to compensate a person who, during the period when the document was made available for public inspection as required by Article 25(1), acquires the Securities issued by the person who submitted the document (excluding the documents specified in Article 25(1)(xii)) or by the person whose Parent Company, etc. (meaning Parent Company, etc. as defined by Article 24-7(1)) is the person having submitted the document (limited to the documents specified in Article 25(1)(xii)) not through Public Offering or Secondary Distribution for damage arising from the fake statement or lack of a required statement (hereinafter collectively referred to as a "Fake Statement, etc." in this Article), to the extent not exceeding the amount calculated according to the same rule as provided in Article 19(1); provided, however, that this shall not apply when the person who acquires the Securities had known of the existence of a Fake Statement, etc. at the time of the acquisition. 例文帳に追加

第二十一条の二　第二十五条第一項各号（第五号及び第九号を除く。）に掲げる書類（以下この条において「書類」という。）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ときは、当該書類の提出者は、当該書類が同項の規定により公衆の縦覧に供されている間に当該書類（同項第十二号に掲げる書類を除く。）の提出者又は当該書類（同号に掲げる書類に限る。）の提出者を親会社等（第二十四条の七第一項に規定する親会社等をいう。）とする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に対し、第十九条第一項の規定の例により算出した額を超えない限度において、記載が虚偽であり、又は欠けていること（以下この条において「虚偽記載等」という。）により生じた損害を賠償する責めに任ずる。ただし、当該有価証券を取得した者がその取得の際虚偽記載等を知つていたときは、この限りでない。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 114-6 (1) In a lawsuit pertaining to an infringement on the moral rights of author, copyright, right of publication, moral rights of performer or neighboring right, the court may, upon petition of a party, issue an order, in the form of a decision, to any other party, etc., trial counsel or assistant in court to a party or legal counsel, that trade secrets (means "trade secrets" as provided for in Article 2, paragraph (6) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Act No. 47 of 1993); the same shall apply hereinafter) in the possession of the [petitioning] party shall not be used for purposes other than those in furtherance of said lawsuit and shall not be disclosed to persons other than those against whom an order pertaining to such trade secrets has been issued pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph, where a prima facie showing has been made that each of the reasons listed below applies; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not apply where, at the time of such petition, the party, etc. [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued], trial counsel [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued] or assistant in court [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued] had already acquired or possessed such trade secrets by means other than through inspection of the briefs as provided for in item (i) or the examination of evidence or the disclosure provided for in that item. 例文帳に追加

第百十四条の六　裁判所は、著作者人格権、著作権、出版権、実演家人格権又は著作隣接権の侵害に係る訴訟において、その当事者が保有する営業秘密（不正競争防止法（平成五年法律第四十七号）第二条第六項に規定する営業秘密をいう。以下同じ。）について、次に掲げる事由のいずれにも該当することにつき疎明があつた場合には、当事者の申立てにより、決定で、当事者等、訴訟代理人又は補佐人に対し、当該営業秘密を当該訴訟の追行の目的以外の目的で使用し、又は当該営業秘密に係るこの項の規定による命令を受けた者以外の者に開示してはならない旨を命ずることができる。ただし、その申立ての時までに当事者等、訴訟代理人又は補佐人が第一号に規定する準備書面の閲読又は同号に規定する証拠の取調べ若しくは開示以外の方法により当該営業秘密を取得し、又は保有していた場合は、この限りでない。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(i) eight days have passed from the date on which the Purchasing Party received the document referred to in Article 5 (or from the date of receipt of the document referred to in Article 4 where the Purchasing Party has received such document on an earlier date); however, if the Purchasing Party had not made Withdrawal/Rescission by said time limit due to being misled by the seller's or the Service Provider's act of misrepresenting information concerning Withdrawal/Rescission in violation of the provision of Article 6 (1), or due to being disturbed by the seller's or the Service Provider's act of intimidating the Purchasing Party in violation of the provision of Paragraph 3 of the same article, it shall be when eight days have passed from the date on which the Purchasing Party received a document, which has been issued by the seller or the Service Provider pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the Purchasing Party may make Withdrawal/Rescission with respect to said sales contract or Service Contract; 例文帳に追加

一　申込者等が第五条の書面を受領した日（その日前に第四条の書面を受領した場合にあつては、その書面を受領した日）から起算して八日を経過したとき。ただし、申込者等が、販売業者若しくは役務提供事業者が第六条第一項の規定に違反して申込みの撤回等に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は販売業者若しくは役務提供事業者が同条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでに申込みの撤回等を行わなかつた場合には、当該申込者等が、当該販売業者又は当該役務提供事業者が経済産業省令で定めるところにより当該売買契約又は当該役務提供契約の申込みの撤回等を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過したとき。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(i) eight days have passed from the date on which the Purchasing Party received the document referred to in Article 19 (or from the date of receipt of the document referred to in Article 18 where the Purchasing Party has received such document on an earlier date); however, if the Purchasing Party had not made Withdrawal/Rescission by said time limit due to being misled by the seller's or the Service Provider's act of misrepresenting information concerning Withdrawal/Rescission in violation of the provision of Article 21 (1), or due to being disturbed by the seller's or the Service Provider's act of intimidating the Purchasing Party in violation of the provision of Paragraph 3 of the same article, it shall be when eight days have passed from the date on which the Purchasing Party received a document, which has been issued by the seller or the Service Provider pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the Purchasing Party may make Withdrawal/Rescission with respect to said sales contract or Service Contract; 例文帳に追加

一　申込者等が第十九条の書面を受領した日（その日前に第十八条の書面を受領した場合にあつては、その書面を受領した日）から起算して八日を経過したとき。ただし、申込者等が、販売業者若しくは役務提供事業者が第二十一条第一項の規定に違反して申込みの撤回等に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は販売業者若しくは役務提供事業者が同条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでに申込みの撤回等を行わなかつた場合には、当該申込者等が、当該販売業者又は当該役務提供事業者が経済産業省令で定めるところにより当該売買契約又は当該役務提供契約の申込みの撤回等を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過したとき。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 40-2 (1) Where 20 days have passed from the date on which the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor received the document referred to in Article 37 (2), he/she may terminate the Multilevel Marketing Contract (if the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor had not rescinded the Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to the provision of Article 40 (1) by said time limit due to being misled by the Supervisor's or the solicitor's act, in violation of the provision of Article 34 (1), or the general multilevel marketing distributor' act, in violation of Article 34 (2), of misrepresenting information concerning rescission of Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph, or due to being disturbed by the Supervisor's, the solicitor's, or the general multilevel marketing distributor's act of intimidating the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor in violation of the provision of Article 34 (3), it shall be when 20 days have passed from the date on which the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor received a document, which has been issued by Supervisor, the solicitor, or the general multilevel marketing distributor pertaining to such Multilevel Marketing pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor may rescind said Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to the provision of Article 40 (1)). 例文帳に追加

第四十条の二　連鎖販売加入者は、第三十七条第二項の書面を受領した日から起算して二十日を経過した後（連鎖販売加入者が、統括者若しくは勧誘者が第三十四条第一項の規定に違反し若しくは一般連鎖販売業者が同条第二項の規定に違反して前条第一項の規定による連鎖販売契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は統括者、勧誘者若しくは一般連鎖販売業者が第三十四条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでに前条第一項の規定による連鎖販売契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、当該連鎖販売加入者が、その連鎖販売業に係る統括者、勧誘者又は一般連鎖販売業者が同項の経済産業省令で定めるところにより同項の規定による当該連鎖販売契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して二十日を経過した後）においては、将来に向かつてその連鎖販売契約の解除を行うことができる。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(3) Where a seller concludes a Specified Right Sales Contract, the purchaser of the rights to receive offer of the Specified Continuous Services may terminate the Specified Right Sales Contract when eight days have passed from the date on which he/she received the document referred to in Article 42 (3) (if the purchaser of the rights to receive offer of the Specified Continuous Services had not rescinded the Specified Right Sales Contract pursuant to the provision of Article 48 (1) by said time limit due to being misled by the seller's act of misrepresenting, in violation of the provision of Article 44 (1), information concerning the rescission of the Specified Right Sales Contract pursuant to the provision of Paragraph 1 of this article, or due to being disturbed by the seller's act of intimidating the purchaser of the rights to receive offers of the Specified Continuous Services in violation of the provision of Article 44 (3), it shall be when eight days have passed from the date on which the purchaser of the rights to receive offers of the Specified Continuous Services received a document, which has been issued by the Service Provider pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry referred to in the same paragraph and contains a notice to the effect that the purchaser of the rights to receive offers of the Specified Continuous Services may rescind said Specified Right Sales Contract pursuant to the provision of the same paragraph). 例文帳に追加

３　販売業者が特定権利販売契約を締結した場合におけるその特定継続的役務の提供を受ける権利の購入者は、第四十二条第三項の書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過した後（その特定継続的役務の提供を受ける権利の購入者が、販売業者が第四十四条第一項の規定に違反して前条第一項の規定による特定権利販売契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は販売業者が第四十四条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでに前条第一項の規定による特定権利販売契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、当該特定継続的役務の提供を受ける権利の購入者が、当該販売業者が同項の経済産業省令で定めるところにより同項の規定による当該特定権利販売契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過した後）においては、その特定権利販売契約の解除を行うことができる。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

I spoke with FRB (Federal Reserve Board) Chairman Bernanke two weeks ago and also had a chance to speak with People's Bank of China Governor Zhou Xiaochuan this week. Frankly speaking, this is, as a matter of fact, a kind of issue to be decided on by the global forum of the G20, as it relates to stability of financial institutions worldwide and, at the same time, the definition of capital adequacy, and the quality and quantity debate, among other things. A dozen years or so ago, Japan was hit by a financial crisis. When I was previously a minister, I witnessed something similar – the failure of the Hokkaido Takushoku Bank – which resulted in a credit crunch and credit withdrawal that, as many of you must remember, indeed caused a large number of companies to go under one after another. In that sense, it is not necessarily a positive thing to make a capital adequacy ratio higher and higher. 例文帳に追加

私は先々週でございますか、バーナンキＦＲＢ（連邦準備制度理事会）議長ともお話ししましたし、先週というか今週は周小川、中国の中央銀行の総裁とも話をさせていただきましたけれども、率直に言えば、こういった話も当然、非常に世界的なＧ20で決める話でございまして、非常に世界の金融機関の安定性と、それから同時に自己資本の定義、あるいは定義と申しますか、自己資本の定義、それから質と量、こういったことがまた同時に、皆様方ご存じのように十数年前、日本は大変金融ショックといいますか、金融危機に襲われまして、当時、私も与党の国会議員で閣僚をやめたすぐ後で、閣僚のときにも北海道拓殖銀行が倒産したということが起きましたので、本当にあのとき貸し渋り、貸しはがしになりまして、非常に皆さん方もご記憶のある方が多いと思いますが、本当にばたばた企業も倒産いたしまして、そういった意味で、要するに、自己資本の比率が高ければ高いほどいいというものでもございません。 - 金融庁

That said, according to the staff in charge, the Incubator Bank of Japan was cooperative in the first inspection but extremely uncooperative in the second inspection. Mr. Kimura is in a sense truly a specialist, having worked at the Bank of Japan. I have been told that the staff in charge had an extremely tough time in the inspection. The third inspection was conducted with the same lineup after extensive consideration with a strong sense of commitment, where it would normally take three to six months. In the end, the Bank was deemed to have been evading inspections. Being an executive branch of government, our operations must be based on laws and facts, as you are well aware. Basically, it is necessary to ensure fairness, abide by laws and issue business improvement orders or business suspension orders based on facts, so I hope you understand that difficulties were involved in the process. However, what you said is indeed understandable in the context of public sentiment, so I intend to properly fulfill my duty as Minister with that in mind. 例文帳に追加

ただし、担当者の話を聞くと、1回目の検査のときは協力的だったのだけれども、2回目の検査のときは非常に非協力的になって、本当に向こうはある意味専門家ですから、日本銀行におった方でございますし、ですから大変検査で苦労されたという話を聞きまして、3回目は同じ陣容で非常に考えて行って、普通は3ヵ月か6ヵ月の検査ですが、非常に強い決意で検査をして、そして結局検査忌避ということになったわけでございますが、行政でございますから、ご存じのように法律と事実に基づいてやっていかないと、そこはやはり行政ですから、公平、それから法律を守る、そしてやはり事実に基づいて業務改善命令、あるいは業務停止命令を出すということは基本的に必要でございますから、そこら辺の苦労もあったということもご理解いただきたいと思いますが、しかし今言われたこも国民感情としてもよく分かりますので、私はやはり大臣でございますから、そういったことしっかり念頭に入れつつやらせていただきたいと思っております。 - 金融庁

As I informed you when I met with US Federal Reserve Board (FRB) Chairman Ben Bernanke, the Governor of the People's Bank of China Zhou Xiaochuan and other governors of central banks in August 2010, financial institutions—especially banks engaged in international operations—will certainly become more stable if they have more capital. In Japan, however, both public and private sectors had a very bitter experience during the financial crisis 12 years ago. Looking back, even sustainable companies that would otherwise have been sound were forced into bankruptcy due to the widespread credit crunch and credit withdrawal resulting from financial institutions seeking to secure capital temporarily, and the damage incurred was particularly extensive among small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). At the time, the Nikkei Average looked as though it was about to fall below 7,000 yen, so Japan's argument based on such experience has been reflected in the G20 Summit declarations to date and the agreement announced at the recent meeting of the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision. 例文帳に追加

私が（本年）８月にアメリカのバーナンキ（連邦準備制度理事会議長）、あるいは中国の周小川（中国人民銀行行長）、中央銀行のそれぞれのトップとお会いしてきた時も皆様方にお伝えしましたように、金融機関、特に国際業務をする銀行は、自己資本が高ければ高いほど確かに安定はいたしますけれども、日本でも12年前、大変な金融ショックがあり、官民挙げて非常に苦しい経験があるわけでございますが、あれを振り返っても一時自己資本を確保するために貸し渋り、貸し剥がしが非常に横行しまして、普通であれば健全にやっていける持続可能な企業まで倒産せざるを得ないというような現象が起きまして、特に中小企業にはその被害が大変広く及びまして、もう皆様方もよくお分かりのように、あのとき株価も7,000円を割るかというような状況があったわけでございますから、そういったことを踏まえて、我が国の主張は、これまでのG20の首脳声明や先般の中央銀行総裁・金融監督当局長官会合での合意にもこの前から発表させていただいておりますように、反映されています。 - 金融庁

Where a person accused of an offence under section 103 proves - (a) that in the ordinary course of his business he is employed on behalf of other persons to apply trade marks or trade descriptions, or as the case may be, to make dies, blocks, machines, plates, or other instruments for making, or being used in making, trade marks; and (b) that in the case which is the subject of the charge he was so employed, and was not interested in the goods or other thing by way of profit or commission dependent on the sale of such goods or providing of services, as the case may be; and (c) that, having taken all reasonable precautions against committing the offence charged, he had, at the time of the commission of the alleged offence, no reason to suspect the genuineness of the trade mark or trade description; and (d) that, on demand made by or on behalf of the prosecutor, he gave all the information in his power with respect to the persons on whose behalf the trade mark or trade description was applied, he shall be acquitted. 例文帳に追加

103条違反で告訴された者が，次に掲げることを立証したときは，無罪とする。 (a) その者が他人に雇用された者であって，自己の通常の業務上他人のために商標若しくは取引表示を使用し，又は場合に応じて商標を作成し若しくは商標の作成のために使用される打型，版木，機械，板金，若しくはその他の器具を製作したこと (b) 告訴の対象となっている事件において，自己が他人に雇用された者であり，かつ，違反に係る商品の販売又は場合に応じてサービスの提供による利潤若しくは歩合を得ることによってその商品又はその他の物に利害関係を有するものではないこと (c) 告訴された違反を防止するために一切の合理的な措置を講じ，違反とされることを行ったとき，商標又は取引表示が真正なものであることを疑う理由がなかったこと，及び (d) その者の代わりに商標又は取引表示が使用された当人に関して一切の情報を，自己の権限で，告訴人の要求により若しくは告訴人のために，提供したこと - 特許庁

According to what I have heard from the administrative staff, the Incubator Bank of Japan was inspected twice before the latest inspection for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009, as I just mentioned: the previous inspection was for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 and the one before that was for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005. My understanding is that as at the end of the fiscal year subject to each of the previous two inspections, the Bank’s financial position was assets in excess of liabilities according to the results of these inspections. Also, my understanding is that there were no material violations of laws and regulations, inadequacies in systems or other such problems in its business operations that would lead to administrative actions as found in the latest inspection. As I have repeatedly stated, at the time of the first inspection, the Bank engaged in operations allegedly based on a new business model targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Lehman Brothers shockwave that struck at the time may have been one of the factors. That said, then-Chairman Takeshi Kimura is an extremely capable person, who, according to what I have been told, had an authoritarian management style, so I suspect overambitious business expansions gave rise to the present outcome. 例文帳に追加

私は、事務方から聞いているところによりますと、日本振興銀行に対して、直近の21年3月期を基準日とする検査のほかに、過去、今さっき（申し上げた）ように19年３月期及び17年3月期を基準日とする前回及び前々回検査を実施しておりますが、上記検査の結果、同行は、前回及び前々回検査の検査基準日において、財務状況に関しては資産超過の状況にあったものと認識しておりますが、また業務運営に関しても、直近検査に認められたような行政処分につながる重大な法令違反や体制の不備等はなかったものと認識をしておりますが、私が何回も申しましたように、途中から無理な業容の拡大や経営陣による、率直に言えば無理な経営拡大を急ぎ過ぎたといいますか、最初は私も先週言いましたように、最初の1回目の検査のときには、非常に中小企業を対象とした新しいビジネスモデルだというようなことでやっておられたけれども、それからリーマン・ショックも重なったということもあるのかもしれませんけれども、非常に無理な業容の拡大を行い、当時の木村剛会長のもとで、非常にこの方は能力のある方で、しかし、悪く言えばワンマン経営だったというふうなことを漏れ聞いておりますけれども、業容拡大に非常に走ったということが、今日の結果を招いたのではないかなというふうに思っております。 - 金融庁

Article 13 (1) An Insured Person for whom it is determined that his or her domicile has changed to a location of one of the following facilities (herein referred to as "Facility Subject to Domicile Exception") and is located by admission or residence (herein referred to as "Admission, etc.") in said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception (an Insured Person for whom it is determined that his or her domicile has changed to a location where said Facility is located by moving into said Facility as listed in item (iii) is limited to a person for whom the admission measures are pursuant to the provisions of Article 11, paragraph (1), item (i) of the Public Aid for the Aged Act; hereinafter referred to as "Insured Person Subject to Domicile Exception" in this Article) and for whom it is determined to have had domicile in another Municipality (a Municipality other than the Municipality where said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception is located) at the time of moving in for Admission, etc., at said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception, shall be an Insured Person of Long-Term Care Insurance provided by said other Municipality of prior domicile, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9; however, provided that this provision shall not apply to an Insured Person Subject to Domicile Exception who moved in for Admission, etc., into two or more of a said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception, and said Person is determined to have moved consecutively from one said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception in which said Insured Person was admitted immediately prior to the said Facility Subject to Domicile Exception where said Insured Person is currently residing for Admission, etc. (herein referred to as the "Facility of First Prior Admission of an Insured Person" in this paragraph) into a Facility Subject to Domicile Exception in which said Insured Person is currently residing (herein referred to as the "Facility of Current Admission of an Insured Person" in this paragraph and the following paragraph) (collectively herein referred to as "Specified Continuous Admission of an Insured Person" in the following paragraph): 例文帳に追加

第十三条　次に掲げる施設（以下「住所地特例対象施設」という。）に入所又は入居（以下この条において「入所等」という。）をすることにより当該住所地特例対象施設の所在する場所に住所を変更したと認められる被保険者（第三号に掲げる施設に入所することにより当該施設の所在する場所に住所を変更したと認められる被保険者にあっては、老人福祉法第十一条第一項第一号の規定による入所措置がとられた者に限る。以下この条において「住所地特例対象被保険者」という。）であって、当該住所地特例対象施設に入所等をした際他の市町村（当該住所地特例対象施設が所在する市町村以外の市町村をいう。）の区域内に住所を有していたと認められるものは、第九条の規定にかかわらず、当該他の市町村が行う介護保険の被保険者とする。ただし、二以上の住所地特例対象施設に継続して入所等をしている住所地特例対象被保険者であって、現に入所等をしている住所地特例対象施設（以下この項及び次項において「現入所施設」という。）に入所等をする直前に入所等をしていた住所地特例対象施設（以下この項において「直前入所施設」という。）及び現入所施設のそれぞれに入所等をすることにより直前入所施設及び現入所施設のそれぞれの所在する場所に順次住所を変更したと認められるもの（次項において「特定継続入所被保険者」という。）については、この限りでない。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 48 (1) Where a Service Provider or a seller concludes a Contract on Specified Continuous Service Offers, etc., the Specified Continuous Service Recipient, etc. may rescind such Contract on Specified Continuous Service Offers, etc. in writing, except when eight days have passed from the date on which he/she received the document referred to in Article 42 (2) or (3) (if the Specified Continuous Service Recipient, etc. had not rescinded the Contract on Specified Continuous Service Offers, etc. pursuant to this paragraph by said time limit due to being misled by the Service Provider's or the seller's act of misrepresenting, in violation of the provision of Article 44 (1), information concerning rescission of the Contract on Specified Continuous Service Offers, etc. pursuant to the provision of this paragraph, or due to being disturbed by the Service Provider's or the seller's act of intimidating the Specified Continuous Service Recipient, etc. in violation of the provision of Article 44 (3), it shall be when eight days have passed from the date on which the Specified Continuous Service Recipient, etc. received a document, which has been issued by the Service Provider or the seller pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the Specified Continuous Service Recipient, etc. may rescind said Contract on Specified Continuous Service Offers, etc. pursuant to the provision of this paragraph). 例文帳に追加

第四十八条　役務提供事業者又は販売業者が特定継続的役務提供等契約を締結した場合におけるその特定継続的役務提供受領者等は、第四十二条第二項又は第三項の書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過したとき（特定継続的役務提供受領者等が、役務提供事業者若しくは販売業者が第四十四条第一項の規定に違反してこの項の規定による特定継続的役務提供等契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は役務提供事業者若しくは販売業者が同条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでにこの項の規定による特定継続的役務提供等契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、当該特定継続的役務提供受領者等が、当該役務提供事業者又は当該販売業者が経済産業省令で定めるところによりこの項の規定による当該特定継続的役務提供等契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過したとき）を除き、書面によりその特定継続的役務提供等契約の解除を行うことができる。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 49 (1) Where a Service Provider concludes a Specified Continuous Service Contract, the recipient of the Specified Continuous Services may terminate said contract when eight days have passed from the date on which he/she received the document referred to in Article 42 (2) (if the recipient of the Specified Continuous Services had not rescinded the Specified Continuous Service Contract pursuant to the provision of Article 48 (1) by said time limit due to being misled by the Service Provider's act of misrepresenting, in violation of the provision of Article 44 (1), information concerning the rescission of the Specified Continuous Service Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph, or due to being disturbed by the Service Provider's act of intimidating the recipient of the Specified Continuous Services in violation of the provision of Article 44 (3), it shall be when eight days have passed from the date on which the recipient of the Specified Continuous Services received a document, which has been issued by the Service Provider pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry under the same paragraph and contains a notice to the effect that the recipient of the Specified Continuous Services may rescind said Specified Continuous Service Contract pursuant to the provision of the same paragraph). 例文帳に追加

第四十九条　役務提供事業者が特定継続的役務提供契約を締結した場合におけるその特定継続的役務の提供を受ける者は、第四十二条第二項の書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過した後（その特定継続的役務の提供を受ける者が、役務提供事業者が第四十四条第一項の規定に違反して前条第一項の規定による特定継続的役務提供契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は役務提供事業者が第四十四条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでに前条第一項の規定による特定継続的役務提供契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、当該特定継続的役務の提供を受ける者が、当該役務提供事業者が同項の経済産業省令で定めるところにより同項の規定による当該特定継続的役務提供契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して八日を経過した後）においては、将来に向かつてその特定継続的役務提供契約の解除を行うことができる。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

Article 58 (1) Where a person conducting Business Opportunity Related Sales concludes a Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract pertaining to the Business Opportunity Related Sales, the counterparty of the contract (limited to an individual who conducts business made available or mediated in relation to such Business Opportunity Related Sales at a place other than a Business Establishment, etc.; hereinafter referred to as the "Counterparty" in this article to Article 58-3) may rescind such Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract in writing, except when 20 days have passed from the date on which he/she received the document referred to in Article 55 (2) (if the Counterparty had not rescinded the Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract pursuant to this paragraph by said time limit due to being misled by an act of the person conducting Business Opportunity Related Sales of misrepresenting, in violation of the provision of Article 52 (1), information concerning rescission of a Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph, or due to being disturbed by an act of the person conducting Business Opportunity Related Sales of intimidating the Counterparty in violation of the provision of Article 52 (2), it shall be when 20 days have passed from the date on which the Counterparty received a document, which has been issued by the person conducting Business Opportunity Related Sales pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the Counterparty may rescind said Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph). In this case, the person conducting Business Opportunity Related Sales may not claim damages or demand payment of a penalty pertaining to the rescission of the Business Opportunity Related Sales Contract. 例文帳に追加

第五十八条　業務提供誘引販売業を行う者がその業務提供誘引販売業に係る業務提供誘引販売契約を締結した場合におけるその業務提供誘引販売契約の相手方（その業務提供誘引販売業に関して提供され、又はあつせんされる業務を事業所等によらないで行う個人に限る。以下この条から第五十八条の三までにおいて「相手方」という。）は、第五十五条第二項の書面を受領した日から起算して二十日を経過したとき（相手方が、業務提供誘引販売業を行う者が第五十二条第一項の規定に違反してこの項の規定による業務提供誘引販売契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は業務提供誘引販売業を行う者が同条第二項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでにこの項の規定による業務提供誘引販売契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、相手方が、当該業務提供誘引販売業を行う者が経済産業省令で定めるところによりこの項の規定による当該業務提供誘引販売契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して二十日を経過したとき）を除き、書面によりその業務提供誘引販売契約の解除を行うことができる。この場合において、その業務提供誘引販売業を行う者は、その業務提供誘引販売契約の解除に伴う損害賠償又は違約金の支払を請求することができない。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

I made a comment at the informal ministerial gathering today, which was obviously not a comment from the head of the administration, but I am Vice-Chief of the People's New Party (PNP), and the current government is, as you know, a coalition of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and the PNP. Accordingly, Prime Minister Kan, right after he assumed office, met with (PNP) Chief Shizuka Kamei to discuss how the two parties would cooperate in policymaking, at which meeting I was also present as the PNP Secretary-General at that time. Under the three-party coalition that preceded the current one, there was a committee called the Ministerial Committee on Basic Policies, which was set up as a forum for the parties to coordinate or match their policies, but then the Social Democratic Party left the coalition. That is why how the remaining parties should cooperate in policymaking afterwards was a subject of discussion at the party leader meeting right after Prime Minister Kan became the new Prime Minister, during which both leaders agreed to go about it properly. Then as it turned out, as you know, we had a House of Councilors election and the same subject also just came up again during the recent meeting of the two party leaders, who supposedly agreed to "do it (policy cooperation)." That is why I decided to make an elaborate comment on this subject to Prime Minister Kan at today's informal ministerial gathering, to which Prime Minister Kan responded by telling Mr. Gemba, who is a state minister and is also DPJ's Policy Research Committee Chair, to work on policy cooperation with the PNP in the proper way - therefore, Policy Research Committee Chair Gemba and I proceeded to discuss how it should be done, a task that I presume will basically be handled mainly by policy research committee chairs. 例文帳に追加

今日、閣僚懇で、私はこれは行政の長としての発言ではございませんけれども、国民新党の副代表でもございますし、両党、民主党と国民新党のご存じのように連立内閣でございますから、両党間の政策協議をどうするのかということは、実は菅総理がなられた後、すぐ亀井静香（国民新党）代表と話をされまして、当時私は幹事長でございましたから、同席をいたしまして、前の3党連立内閣のときは、基本政策閣僚委員会というのがございまして、ここで政策を整合性を図る、あるいはすり合わせをするということでございましたが、社民党さんが連立を離脱されましたので、その後の政策協力をどうするかということが当時菅総理が実現した後のすぐの党首会談でのテーマで、しっかりやりましょうという話でございましたが、ご存じのように参議院選挙になりましたので、またこの前も両党首会談でそのことが議題になって、「（政策協力を）やろう」ということでございましたから、今日閣僚懇で菅総理に相当申し上げまして、ちょうど玄葉さんが民主党の国務大臣兼政調会長でございますから、菅総理からもきちっと国民新党のほうとの政策協議をするようにということでございまして、玄葉政調会長と私ともどういうふうにするのかと、基本的に政調会長中心だというふうに思いますけれども、そのことを打ち合わせをさせていただいたわけでございます。 - 金融庁

(4) When forfeiture is directed on a conviction the Court, before whom the person convicted, may order any forfeited article to be destroyed or otherwise disposed of as the Court thinks fit. Where a person is accused of an offence under section 73 of this Act and proves. (a) that in the ordinary course of his business he is employed on behalf of other persons to apply trademarks or trade descriptions, or, as the case may be, to make dies, blocks, machines, plates, or other instruments for making, or being used in making, trademarks; (b) that in the case which is the subject of the charge he was so employed, 58 and was not interested in the goods or service or other thing by way of profit or commission dependent on the sale of such goods or services or other things, as the case may be; (c) that the took reasonable precautions against committing the offence charged; (d) that he had, at the time of the commission of the alleged offence, on reason to suspect the genuineness of the trademark or trade description; and (e) that on demand made by or on behalf of the prosecutor, he gave all the information in his power with respect to the persons on whose behalf the mark or description was applied; the Court may discharge the person from the complaint. 例文帳に追加

(4)没収が有罪判決について命令された場合、裁判所は、有罪を宣告された者に、没収が命じられたいかなる物品についても廃棄又は裁判所が適切と考えるその他の処分を命ずることができる。本法第73条に定める違反に係る被疑者が次に掲げる事項を立証した場合、裁判所は訴追を取り下げることができる。(a)自己の事業の通常の過程において、他の者に代わり、商標若しくは商品表示を付するために、又は(場合に応じ)、商標の制作用若しくは当該制作に使用される金型、版、機器、板材又はその他の器具を製作するために、当該他の者に雇用されていること。(b)容疑の対象となる事件において、そのように雇用されていた事実、及び、かかる商品若しくは役務(場合に応じ)の販売によって決まる利益若しくは手数料のを得る手段としての当該商品若しくは役務又はその他の物品に関与していなかったこと。(c)容疑の対象となった違反を犯さないよう合理的予防措置を講じていたこと。(d)違反行為を実行したとされる時点において、当該商標又は商品表示の真実性を疑う理由があったこと。(e)検察官により、又は検察官に代わって行われた要求に応じて、当該標章又は表示をその者のために付した者に関し、自らの権能が及ぶすべての情報を提出したこと。 - 特許庁

Article 40 (1) Where a person conducting Multilevel Marketing concludes a Multilevel Marketing Contract pertaining to the Multilevel Marketing, the counterparty of such Multilevel Marketing Contract (limited to an individual who sells or mediates sales of Goods or offers or mediates offers of services pertaining to such Multilevel Marketing by means other than through a Store, etc.; hereinafter referred to as a "New Multilevel Marketing Distributor") may rescind such Multilevel Marketing Contract in writing, except when 20 days have passed from the date on which the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor received the document referred to in Article 37 (2) (where the specified burden involved in such Multilevel Marketing Contract is the purchase of the Goods [excluding rights to use a facility or to receive offers of services; hereinafter the same shall apply in this item] to be resold and if the date of the first delivery of the Goods purchased based on such Multilevel Marketing Contract is after such date of receipt, it shall be such date of first delivery; the same shall apply in Article 41 (1)) (if the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor had not rescinded the Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to this paragraph by said time limit due to being misled by the Supervisor's or the solicitor's act, in violation of the provision of Article 34 (1), or the general multilevel marketing distributor's act, in violation of Article 34 (2), of misrepresenting information concerning rescission of Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph, or due to being disturbed by the Supervisor's, the solicitor's, or the general multilevel marketing distributor's act of intimidating the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor in violation of the provision of Article 34 (3), it shall be when 20 days have passed from the date on which the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor received a document, which has been issued by Supervisor, the solicitor, or the general multilevel marketing distributor pertaining to such Multilevel Marketing pursuant to an Ordinance of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and contains a notice to the effect that the New Multilevel Marketing Distributor may rescind said Multilevel Marketing Contract pursuant to the provision of this paragraph). In this case, the person conducting such Multilevel Marketing may not claim damages or demand payment of a penalty pertaining to the rescission of such Multilevel Marketing Contract. 例文帳に追加

第四十条　連鎖販売業を行う者がその連鎖販売業に係る連鎖販売契約を締結した場合におけるその連鎖販売契約の相手方（その連鎖販売業に係る商品の販売若しくはそのあつせん又は役務の提供若しくはそのあつせんを店舗等によらないで行う個人に限る。以下この章において「連鎖販売加入者」という。）は、第三十七条第二項の書面を受領した日（その連鎖販売契約に係る特定負担が再販売をする商品（施設を利用し及び役務の提供を受ける権利を除く。以下この項において同じ。）の購入についてのものである場合において、その連鎖販売契約に基づき購入したその商品につき最初の引渡しを受けた日がその受領した日後であるときは、その引渡しを受けた日。次条第一項において同じ。）から起算して二十日を経過したとき（連鎖販売加入者が、統括者若しくは勧誘者が第三十四条第一項の規定に違反し若しくは一般連鎖販売業者が同条第二項の規定に違反してこの項の規定による連鎖販売契約の解除に関する事項につき不実のことを告げる行為をしたことにより当該告げられた内容が事実であるとの誤認をし、又は統括者、勧誘者若しくは一般連鎖販売業者が同条第三項の規定に違反して威迫したことにより困惑し、これらによつて当該期間を経過するまでにこの項の規定による連鎖販売契約の解除を行わなかつた場合には、当該連鎖販売加入者が、その連鎖販売業に係る統括者、勧誘者又は一般連鎖販売業者が経済産業省令で定めるところによりこの項の規定による当該連鎖販売契約の解除を行うことができる旨を記載して交付した書面を受領した日から起算して二十日を経過したとき）を除き、書面によりその連鎖販売契約の解除を行うことができる。この場合において、その連鎖販売業を行う者は、その連鎖販売契約の解除に伴う損害賠償又は違約金の支払を請求することができない。 - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム