立川ビラまき最高裁判決英訳流通計画始動！

　自衛隊官舎にビラまきをした反戦運動家３人に対し、７５日間も逮捕・勾留したうえ、最高裁が罰金１０万円～２０万円という高裁判決を認めたことは、日本における市民の自由がおかれた状況を示す格好の例だ。そこで、この判決を英訳し、日本の裁判所の判断の当否を世界の市民に考えてもらおうと思う。まずは、判決全文を掲載する。同時に下記ＵＲＬにて、裁判所が自らなした英訳全文を掲載する。あなたの知り合いの外国人に英訳判決を見せて反応を教えてほしい。(ところで、英訳は原文に忠実になされているでしょうか？どなたか、ご確認いただければ助かります)

英訳のURL
vol.1 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/b15bf213e32f2b439c876cb510cc5906
vol.2 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558
voi.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663
vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54

■■以下、最高裁平成２０年４月１１日判決■■

主文
本件各上告を棄却する。

理由

第１ 被告人３名の弁護人栗山れい子ほかの上告趣意のうち，本件被告人らの行
為をもって刑法１３０条前段の罪に問うことは憲法２１条１項に違反するとの主張
について

１ 原判決の認定及び記録によれば，本件の事実関係は，次のとおりである。

(1) 立川宿舎の状況等

ア 全般
東京都立川市所在の防衛庁（当時。以下同じ。）立川宿舎（以下「立川宿舎」と
いう。）の敷地は，南北に細長い長方形（南北方向の辺の長さは約４００ｍ，東西
方向の辺の長さは約５０ｍである。以下「南側敷地」という。）の北端に東西に細
長い長方形（南北方向の辺の長さは約２５ｍ，東西方向の辺の長さは約１３０ｍで
ある。以下「北側敷地」という。）が西側に伸びる形で付いた逆Ｌ字形をしてい
る。南側敷地の東側，北側敷地の東側と北側が，一般道路に面し，南側敷地の西
側，北側敷地の西側と南側の西半分が，自衛隊東立川駐屯地と接している。南側敷
地の南半分には，南から北へ順に１号棟ないし８号棟の集合住宅が建っている。い
ずれも東西に細長い直方体であり，鉄筋４階建てで，各階に６室ずつある（１号棟
ないし８号棟の敷地の南北方向の辺の長さは約２００ｍである。）。南側敷地の北
半分は，南北に細長い長方形の空き地（以下「北側空き地」という。）になってい
る。北側敷地には，東西に並んで東から西へ順に９号棟，１０号棟の前同様の集合
住宅が建っている。ただし，９号棟及び１０号棟は，いずれも５階建てで，１０号
棟は各階に８室ずつある。

イ 立川宿舎の敷地の囲にょう状況
(ア) １号棟ないし８号棟の敷地は，南側は高さ約１．５ｍの鉄製フェンス，一
般道路に面する東側は，高さ約１．５ｍないし約１．６ｍの鉄製フェンスないし金
網フェンス，北側空き地と接する北側は木製杭，自衛隊東立川駐屯地と接する西側
は，門扉のある通用門１か所のほかは，高さ約１．８５ｍないし約２．１ｍの鉄製
フェンスで囲まれている。東側のフェンスは，各号棟の北側通路に通じる出入口と
なる部分がそれぞれ１号棟に係るものから順に幅約７．１ｍ，約５．９ｍ，約８
ｍ，約６．１ｍ，約６．３ｍ，約５ｍ，約９ｍ，約６．１ｍにわたって開口してお
り，各開口部に門扉はない。北側の木製杭には，おおむね等間隔に４本の鉄線が張
られている。
(イ) ９号棟及び１０号棟の敷地も，高さ約１．５ｍないし約１．７ｍの金網フ
ェンスないし鉄製フェンスで囲まれ，一般道路に面する東側，北側のフェンスは，
各号棟の出入口となる部分が幅数ｍないし約８．２ｍにわたって開口するなどして
おり，各開口部に門扉はない。

ウ 立川宿舎の敷地の案内板等の状況
(ア) １号棟ないし８号棟の敷地の東側フェンスの１号棟の北側通路に通じる出
入口となる開口部付近に，「防衛庁立川宿舎案内図」と題する案内板がある。同フ
ェンスの各号棟の北側通路に通じる出入口となる各開口部の向かってすぐ左のフェ
ンス部分に，いずれも，Ａ３判大の横長の白色の用紙に，縦書きで，
「宿舎地域内の禁止事項
一関係者以外，地域内に立ち入ること
一ビラ貼り・配り等の宣伝活動
一露店（土地の占有）等による物品販売及び押し売り
一車両の駐車
一その他，人に迷惑をかける行為
管理者」
と印刷されてビニールカバーが掛けられた禁止事項表示板が設置されている。
(イ) ９号棟及び１０号棟の敷地を囲むフェンスの９号棟の出入口となる前記イ
(イ)の開口部付近に，前同様の「防衛庁立川宿舎案内図」と題する案内板があり，
同フェンスの各号棟の出入口となる前記イ(イ)の各開口部の向かってすぐ左ないし
右のフェンス部分に，前同様の禁止事項表示板が設置されている。

エ 各号棟の状況
(ア) １号棟ないし９号棟には，それぞれ東側階段，中央階段，西側階段があ
り，各号棟の１階には，その北側に各階段ごとに各階段に通じる門扉のない３か所
の出入口があり，１０号棟の１階には，その北側に，東側階段，東側中階段，西側
中階段，西側階段に通じる門扉のない４か所の出入口がある。これらの出入口に
は，それぞれ集合郵便受けが設置されている。これらの階段に面して各階２室ずつ
の玄関があり，各室玄関ドアには新聞受けが設置されている。
(イ) １号棟ないし１０号棟の１階出入口にある掲示板又は集合郵便受けの上部
の壁等には，Ａ４判大の横長の白色又は黄色の用紙に，縦書きで，前記禁止事項表
示板と同じ文言が印刷された禁止事項表示物が，一部はビニールカバーが掛けられ
て，掲示されていた。

オ 立川宿舎の管理状況
立川宿舎は，防衛庁の職員及びその家族が居住するための国が設置する宿舎であ
る。本件当時，１号棟ないし８号棟は，ほぼ全室に居住者が入居していた。国家公
務員宿舎法，同法施行令等により，敷地及び５号棟ないし８号棟は陸上自衛隊東立
川駐屯地業務隊長の管理，１号棟ないし４号棟は航空自衛隊第１補給処立川支処長
の管理となっており，９号棟，１０号棟は防衛庁契約本部ないし同庁技術研究本部
第３研究所の管理下にある。
(2) テント村の活動状況等
「立川自衛隊監視テント村」（以下「テント村」という。）は，自衛隊の米軍立
川基地移駐に際して結成された団体で，反戦平和を課題とし，示威運動，駅頭情報
宣伝活動，駐屯地に対する申入れ活動等を行っている。被告人３名は，いずれもテ
ント村の構成員として活動している者である。
(3) テント村の活動とこれに対する立川宿舎の管理者の対応
ア テント村は，平成１５年夏に関連法律が成立して自衛隊のイラク派遣が迫っ
てきたころから，これに反対する活動として，駅頭情報宣伝活動やデモを積極的に
行うようになった。
イ テント村は，自衛官及びその家族に向けて，平成１５年１０月中ごろ，同年
１１月終わりころ，同年１２月１３日と月１回の割合で，それぞれ，「自衛官のみ
なさん・家族のみなさんへイラクへの派兵が，何をもたらすというのか？」，
「自衛官のみなさん・家族のみなさんへ殺すのも・殺されるのもイヤだと言お
う」，「イラクへ行くな，自衛隊！ 戦争では何も解決しない」との表題の下に，
自衛隊のイラク派遣に反対し，かつ，自衛官に対しイラク派兵に反対するよう促
し，自衛官のためのホットラインの存在を知らせる内容のＡ４判大のビラを，立川
宿舎の各号棟の１階出入口の集合郵便受け又は各室玄関ドアの新聞受けに投かんし
た。
ウ 前記イの平成１５年１２月１３日のビラの投かん後，陸上自衛隊東立川駐屯
地業務隊長の職務を補佐する同業務隊厚生科長，航空自衛隊第１補給処立川支処長
の職務を補佐する同支処業務課長ら立川宿舎の管理業務に携わっていた者は，連絡
を取り合った上，管理者の意を受けて，それぞれの管理部分ごとに分担するなどし
て，同月１８日，前記(1)ウ(ア)，(イ)のとおり，禁止事項表示板を立川宿舎の敷
地の一般道路に面するフェンスの各号棟の出入口となる各開口部のすぐわきのフェ
ンス部分に設置し，同月１９日から同月２４日にかけて，前記(1)エ(イ)のとお
り，禁止事項表示物を各号棟の１階出入口に掲示した。
エ そのころ，前記イの平成１５年１２月１３日のビラの投かんについて，立川
宿舎の管理業務に携わっていた者により管理者の意を受けて警察に住居侵入の被害
届が提出された。
(4) 本件ビラ投かんの状況等
ア 被告人３名は，共謀の上，テント村の活動の一環として，「自衛官・ご家族
の皆さんへ自衛隊のイラク派兵反対！ いっしょに考え，反対の声をあげよ
う！」との表題の下，前同様の内容のＡ４判大のビラを，立川宿舎の各号棟の各室
玄関ドアの新聞受けに投かんする目的で，平成１６年１月１７日午前１１時３０分
過ぎころから午後０時ころまでの間，立川宿舎の敷地内に３名とも立ち入った上，
分担して，３号棟東側階段，同棟中央階段，５号棟東側階段，６号棟東側階段及び
７号棟西側階段に通じる各１階出入口からそれぞれ４階の各室玄関前まで立ち入
り，各室玄関ドアの新聞受けに上記ビラを投かんするなどした。
イ 平成１６年１月２３日，前記アのビラの投かんについて，立川宿舎の管理業
務に携わっていた者により管理者の意を受けて警察に住居侵入の被害届が提出され
た。なお，同年２月３日に実施された実況見分時には，１号棟及び９号棟の各出入
口並びに３号棟の中央出入口，４号棟の東側出入口，５号棟の西側出入口及び８号
棟の西側出入口には，前記(1)エ(イ)の禁止事項表示物がなかった。
ウ 被告人Ａ及び同Ｂは，共謀の上，テント村の活動の一環として，「ブッシュ
も小泉も戦場には行かない」との表題の下，前同様の内容のＡ４判大のビラを，立
川宿舎の各号棟の各室玄関ドアの新聞受けに投かんする目的で，平成１６年２月２
２日午前１１時３０分過ぎころから午後０時過ぎころまでの間，立川宿舎の敷地内
に２名とも立ち入った上，分担して，３号棟西側階段，５号棟西側階段及び７号棟
西側階段に通じる各１階出入口からそれぞれ４階の各室玄関前まで立ち入り，各室
玄関ドアの新聞受けに上記ビラを投かんするなどした。
エ 平成１６年３月２２日，前記ウのビラの投かんについて，立川宿舎の管理業
務に携わっていた者により管理者の意を受けて警察に住居侵入の被害届が提出され
た。
２(1) 前記１(4)ア，ウのとおり，被告人らは，立川宿舎の敷地内に入り込み，
各号棟の１階出入口から各室玄関前まで立ち入ったものであり，当該立入りについ
て刑法１３０条前段の罪に問われているので，まず，被告人らが立ち入った場所が
同条にいう「人の住居」，「人の看守する邸宅」，「人の看守する建造物」のいず
れかに当たるのかを検討する。
(2) 前記１の立川宿舎の各号棟の構造及び出入口の状況，その敷地と周辺土地
や道路との囲障等の状況，その管理の状況等によれば，各号棟の１階出入口から各
室玄関前までの部分は，居住用の建物である宿舎の各号棟の建物の一部であり，宿
舎管理者の管理に係るものであるから，居住用の建物の一部として刑法１３０条に
いう「人の看守する邸宅」に当たるものと解され，また，各号棟の敷地のうち建築
物が建築されている部分を除く部分は，各号棟の建物に接してその周辺に存在し，
かつ，管理者が外部との境界に門塀等の囲障を設置することにより，これが各号棟
の建物の付属地として建物利用のために供されるものであることを明示していると
認められるから，上記部分は，「人の看守する邸宅」の囲にょう地として，邸宅侵
入罪の客体になるものというべきである（最高裁昭和４９年（あ）第７３６号同５
１年３月４日第一小法廷判決・刑集３０巻２号７９頁参照）。
(3) そして，刑法１３０条前段にいう「侵入し」とは，他人の看守する邸宅等
に管理権者の意思に反して立ち入ることをいうものであるところ（最高裁昭和５５
年（あ）第９０６号同５８年４月８日第二小法廷判決・刑集３７巻３号２１５頁参
照），立川宿舎の管理権者は，前記１(1)オのとおりであり，被告人らの立入りが
これらの管理権者の意思に反するものであったことは，前記１の事実関係から明ら
かである。
(4) そうすると，被告人らの本件立川宿舎の敷地及び各号棟の１階出入口から
各室玄関前までへの立入りは，刑法１３０条前段に該当するものと解すべきであ
る。なお，本件被告人らの立入りの態様，程度は前記１の事実関係のとおりであっ
て，管理者からその都度被害届が提出されていることなどに照らすと，所論のよう
に法益侵害の程度が極めて軽微なものであったなどということもできない。

３(1) 所論は，本件被告人らの行為をもって刑法１３０条前段の罪に問うこと
は憲法２１条１項に違反するという。
(2) 確かに，表現の自由は，民主主義社会において特に重要な権利として尊重
されなければならず，被告人らによるその政治的意見を記載したビラの配布は，表
現の自由の行使ということができる。しかしながら，憲法２１条１項も，表現の自
由を絶対無制限に保障したものではなく，公共の福祉のため必要かつ合理的な制限
を是認するものであって，たとえ思想を外部に発表するための手段であっても，そ
の手段が他人の権利を不当に害するようなものは許されないというべきである（最
高裁昭和５９年（あ）第２０６号同年１２月１８日第三小法廷判決・刑集３８巻１
２号３０２６頁参照）。本件では，表現そのものを処罰することの憲法適合性が問
われているのではなく，表現の手段すなわちビラの配布のために「人の看守する邸
宅」に管理権者の承諾なく立ち入ったことを処罰することの憲法適合性が問われて
いるところ，本件で被告人らが立ち入った場所は，防衛庁の職員及びその家族が私
的生活を営む場所である集合住宅の共用部分及びその敷地であり，自衛隊・防衛庁
当局がそのような場所として管理していたもので，一般に人が自由に出入りするこ
とのできる場所ではない。たとえ表現の自由の行使のためとはいっても，このよう
な場所に管理権者の意思に反して立ち入ることは，管理権者の管理権を侵害するの
みならず，そこで私的生活を営む者の私生活の平穏を侵害するものといわざるを得
ない。したがって，本件被告人らの行為をもって刑法１３０条前段の罪に問うこと
は，憲法２１条１項に違反するものではない。このように解することができること
は，当裁判所の判例（昭和４１年（あ）第５３６号同４３年１２月１８日大法廷判
決・刑集２２巻１３号１５４９頁，昭和４２年（あ）第１６２６号同４５年６月１
７日大法廷判決・刑集２４巻６号２８０頁）の趣旨に徴して明らかである。所論は
理由がない。

第２ その余の主張について
憲法違反，判例違反をいう点を含め，実質は単なる法令違反，事実誤認の主張で
あって，刑訴法４０５条の上告理由に当たらない。
よって，同法４０８条により，裁判官全員一致の意見で，主文のとおり判決す
る。
(裁判長裁判官今井功裁判官津野修裁判官中川了滋）


【PR】









★「憎しみはダークサイドへの道、苦しみと痛みへの道なのじゃ」(マスター・ヨーダ)
★「政策を決めるのはその国の指導者です。そして，国民は，つねにその指導者のいいなりになるように仕向けられます。方法は簡単です。一般的な国民に向かっては，われわれは攻撃されかかっているのだと伝え，戦意を煽ります。平和主義者に対しては，愛国心が欠けていると非難すればいいのです。このやりかたはどんな国でも有効です」（ヒトラーの側近ヘルマン・ゲーリング。ナチスドイツを裁いたニュルンベルグ裁判にて）
★「News for the People in Japanを広めることこそ日本の民主化実現への有効な手段だ（笑）」（ヤメ蚊）
※このブログのトップページへはここ←をクリックして下さい。過去記事はENTRY ARCHIVE・過去の記事，分野別で読むにはCATEGORY・カテゴリからそれぞれ選択して下さい。
また，このブログの趣旨の紹介及びＴＢ＆コメントの際のお願いはこちら（←クリック）まで。なお、多忙につき、試行的に、コメントの反映はしないようにします。コメント内容の名誉毀損性、プライバシー侵害性についての確認をすることが難しいためです。情報提供、提案、誤りの指摘などは、コメント欄を通じて、今後ともよろしくお願いします。転載、引用はこれまでどおり大歓迎です。

Distributing leaflets : Supreme Court found guilty

Japan Supreme Court's Second Petit Bench found three antiwar activists guilty of trespassing when they entered a housing compound of the Self-Defense Forces in Tachikawa(http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20080427a1.html).A full text of Japan Supreme Court's decision is as below.How do you think about the decision?

■　■　■ vol.4　■　■　■

3(1) The counsels argue that charging the accused with the crime set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code for what they have done contravenes Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution.
(2) It is true that freedom of expression must be respected as an especially important right in democratic society, and the accused's act of distributing leaflets on which their political opinions are stated can be regarded as their exercise of freedom of expression. However, Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution does not guarantee freedom of expression absolutely unconditionally, but rather it allows necessary and reasonable restrictions for public welfare, and therefore even an expression used as a means for presenting a person's own thoughts to outside is unacceptable if it unduly infringes another person's right (See 1984 (A) No. 206, judgment of the Third Petty Bench of the Supreme Court of December 18, 1984, Keishu Vol. 38, No. 12, at 3026). In this case, the point at issue is not the constitutionality of punishing the expression itself but the constitutionality of punishing the act of entering the "premises guarded by another person" without permission of the manager in order to distribute the leaflets, a means of expression. The places where the accused entered are the common areas of the housing complex where the officials of the Defense Agency and their families spend daily life and the site of such housing complex. These places were under the management of the SDF and Defense Agency authorities for such purpose, and the public has no free access to these places. Where a person enters such places against the will of the manager, even for the purpose of exercising freedom of expression, we should say that such entry not only infringes the manager's right of management but also disturbs peace in the private life of people who spend daily life there. In consequence, charging the accused with the crime set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code for what they have done does not contravene Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution. This reasoning is obvious in light of the judicial precedents of this court (1966 (A) No. 536, judgment of the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court of December 18, 1968, Keishu Vol. 22, No. 13, at 1549, 1967 (A) No. 1626, judgment of the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court of June 17, 1970, Keishu Vol. 24, No. 6, at 280). The counsels' argument is groundless.

II. Concerning other reasons
Other reasons for final appeal, including those alleging a violation of the Constitution and violations of judicial precedents, are in effect assertions of unappealable violations of laws and regulations or errors in fact-finding, and none of them can be regarded as a reason for final appeal permissible under Article 405 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Therefore, according to Article 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the judgment has been rendered in the form of the main text by the unanimous consent of the Justices.
Presiding Judge
Justice IMAI Isao
Justice TSUNO Osamu
Justice NAKAGAWA Ryoji



vol.1 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/b15bf213e32f2b439c876cb510cc5906
vol.2 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558
voi.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663
vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54

Distributing leaflets : Supreme Court found guilty

Japan Supreme Court's Second Petit Bench found three antiwar activists guilty of trespassing when they entered a housing compound of the Self-Defense Forces in Tachikawa(http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20080427a1.html).A full text of Japan Supreme Court's decision is as below.How do you think about the decision?

■　■　■ vol.3　■　■　■


(3) Activities of the Tent Village and the reaction thereto of the managers of the Tachikawa Housing Complex
(a) Since around the time the dispatch of the SDF to Iraq was approaching after the relevant laws were enacted in 2003 summer, the Tent Village started to actively carry out protest campaign, such as publicity activities in front of train stations and demonstrations.
(b) The Tent Village posted A4-sized leaflets, once every month (around mid-October 2003, around the end of November 2003, and on December 13, 2003), in the collective mailboxes placed at the gateway on the first floor of each of the buildings of the Tachikawa Housing Complex or the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each residential unit in the buildings. The leaflets contained messages addressed to the SDF members and their families, under the headlines of "To SDF members and their families: What will the SDF dispatch to Iraq bring?," "To SDF members and their families: Say no to killing or to being killed," "SDF, do not go to Iraq! Nothing can be solved by war!," respectively, advocating their opinions against the SDF dispatch to Iraq as well as urging the SDF officials to protest against their dispatch to Iraq and notifying them of the hotline for SDF officials.
(c) After the posting of leaflets on December 13, 2003 mentioned in (b) above, the persons engaging in the management affairs for the Tachikawa Housing Complex, including the chief of the Welfare Section of the JGSDF Camp Higashi Tachikawa Command who was in charge of assisting the Commander of said command and the section chief of the Tachikawa Branch of the JASDF First Depot who was in charge of assisting the director of said branch, through communications among them and on behalf of the managers, placed warning boards on December 18 and put up warning notices during the period from December 19 to 24, while taking partial charge of the work depending on the areas under their management. More specifically, they placed, as described in (1)(c)(A) and (B) above, warning boards on the fences surrounding the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex that face public roads, near the openings on the fences that serve as gateways for the respective buildings, and put up warning notices, as described in (1)(d)(B) above, at the gateway on the first floor of each building.
(d) Around that time, with regard to the posting of leaflets on December 13, 2003 mentioned in (b) above, a report of breaking into a residence was submitted to the police by the persons engaging in the management affairs for the Tachikawa Housing Complex on behalf of the managers.

(4) Circumstances of the posting of leaflets in question
(a) The three accused, in conspiracy, in the course of carrying out the Tent Village's activities, with the intention of posting A4-sized leaflets of the same content as that mentioned above, under the headline of "To SDF members and their families: No SDF dispatch to Iraq! Let's think and protest together!," in the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each residential unit of each building of the Tachikawa Housing Complex, entered the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex on January 17, 2004, from past 11:30 a.m. to around noon, and while dividing the areas among them, they entered Building No. 3, Building No. 5, Building No. 6, and Building No. 7 from the gateway on the first floor of each building leading to the eastern staircase and central staircase of Building No. 3, eastern staircase of Building No. 5, eastern staircase of Building No. 6, and western staircase of Building No. 7, respectively, through to the front of the entrance of each residential unit on the fourth floor, and then posted the leaflets in the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each unit.
(b) On January 23, 2004, with regard to the posting of leaflets mentioned in (a) above, a report of breaking into a residence was submitted to the police by the persons engaging in the management affairs for the Tachikawa Housing Complex on behalf of the managers. When an on-site inspection was implemented on February 3, 2004, there was no warning notice described in (1)(d)(B) above at the gateways of Building No. 1 to Building No. 9, central gateway of Building No. 3, eastern gateway of Building No. 4, western gateway of Building No. 5, and western gateway of Building No. 8.
(c) Accused A and Accused B, in conspiracy, in the course of carrying out the Tent Village's activities, with the intention of posting A4-sized leaflets of the same content as that mentioned above, under the headline of "Neither Bush nor Koizumi goes to war," in the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each residential unit of each building of the Tachikawa Housing Complex, entered the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex on February 22, 2004, from past 11:30 a.m. to around noon, and while dividing the areas among them, they entered Building No. 3, Building No. 5, and Building No. 7 from the gateway on the first floor of each building leading to the western staircase of Building No. 3, western staircase of Building No. 5, and western staircase of Building No. 7, respectively, through to the front of the entrance of each residential unit on the fourth floor, and then posted the leaflets in the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each unit.
(d) On March 22, 2004, with regard to the posting of leaflets mentioned in (c) above, a report of breaking into a residence was submitted to the police by the persons engaging in the management affairs for the Tachikawa Housing Complex on behalf of the managers.

2(1) As described in 1(4)(a) and (c) above, the accused entered the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex, entered the buildings from the gateway on the first floor of each building through to the front of the entrance of each residential unit. They are charged with the crime set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code for having committed such entry. We first examine whether the places where the accused entered can be regarded as a "residence of another person," "premises guarded by another person" or "building guarded by another person," all of which are prescribed in said Article.

(2) In light of the factual circumstances mentioned in 1 above, i.e. the structure of the buildings of the Tachikawa Housing Complex and the conditions of gateways of each building, the conditions of the site of the housing complex and its access from the surrounding land and roads (enclosure), and the status of management of the housing complex, the area covering from the gateway on the first floor of each building to the front of the entrance of each residential unit forms a part of the building of the housing complex, which is a residential building, and is under the management of the managers of the housing complex, and in this respect, said area can be regarded as part of a residential building and the "premises guarded by another person" as set forth in Article 130 of the Penal Code. The part of the site of the buildings, on which no building is actually located, borders on and surrounds each building, and it appears that the managers, by placing fences and other enclosing equipment on the borders with outside, clearly indicate that said part of the site is used for using each building as the building's annexed land. Therefore, said part of the site should be regarded as enclosed land surrounding the "premises guarded by another person" and the object of the crime of breaking into the premises (See 1974 (A) No. 736, judgment of the First Petty Bench of the Supreme Court of March 4, 1976, Keishu Vol. 30, No. 2, at 79).

(3) The term "breaking into" as used in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code means to enter the premises guarded by another person, etc. against the will of the manager (See 1980 (A) No. 906, judgment of the Second Petty Bench of the Supreme Court of April 8, 1983, Keishu Vol. 37, No. 3, at 215). It is obvious from the facts mentioned in 1 above that the entry into the Tachikawa Housing Complex by the accused was against the will of the managers of the housing complex, as described in 1(1)(e) above.

(4) Consequently, the accused's entry into the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex and into the buildings from the gateway on the first floor of each building through to the front of the entrance of each residential unit should be construed to constitute the criminal act set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code. In light of the manner and extent of their entry as described in 1 above as well as the fact that reports of breaking into a residence were submitted by the managers every time they committed the entry, we cannot agree with the counsels' argument that the infringement of legal interests caused by the accused is extremely minor.

→vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54



vol.1 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/b15bf213e32f2b439c876cb510cc5906
vol.2 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558
voi.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663
vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54

Distributing leaflets : Supreme Court found guilty

Japan Supreme Court's Second Petit Bench found three antiwar activists guilty of trespassing when they entered a housing compound of the Self-Defense Forces in Tachikawa(http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20080427a1.html).A full text of Japan Supreme Court's decision is as below.How do you think about the decision?


■　■　■ vol.2　■　■　■


Main text of the judgment
The final appeals are dismissed.

Reasons
I. Concerning the reason for final appeal argued by the appeal counsels for the three accused persons, KURIYAMA Reiko, et al., alleging that charging the accused with the crime set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code for what they have done contravenes Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution

1. According to the findings and records of the judgment of prior instance, the outline of the case is as follows.

(1) Situation of the Tachikawa Housing Complex, etc.

(a) Overall situation
The Tachikawa Housing Complex of the Defense Agency (then; hereinafter the same) located in Tachikawa City, Tokyo (hereinafter referred to as the "Tachikawa Housing Complex") stands on a reverse L-shaped site consisting of a narrow rectangular strip of land stretching from north to south (about 400 meters long from north to south and about 50 meters wide from east to west; hereinafter referred to as the "southern site") with another narrow rectangular strip of land adjacent to the northern end of the former, which stretches from east to west (about 25 meters wide from north to south and about 130 meters long from east to west; hereinafter referred to as the "northern site") and extends westward. The eastern side of the southern site and the eastern side and northern side of the northern site face public roads, and the western side of the southern site and the western side and the western half of the southern side of the northern site border on the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) Camp Higashi Tachikawa. On the southern half of the southern site, a housing complex consisting of eight buildings stands, from Building No. 1 to Building No. 8 in line from south to north. Each building is a slender rectangular reinforced four-story building, having six residential units on each floor (each building stands on a lot of about 200 meters long in the north-south direction). The northern half of the southern site is a rectangular vacant lot stretching from north to south (hereinafter referred to as the "northern vacant lot"). On the northern site, a similar housing complex stands, consisting of Building No. 9 and Building No. 10 in line from east to west. Both Building No. 9 and Building No. 10 have five stories respectively, and Building No. 10 has eight residential units on each floor.

(b) The state of enclosure of the site of Tachikawa Housing Complex
(A) The site on which Building No. 1 to Building No. 8 stand is surrounded by: iron fences each of which is about 1.5 meter high on the south side; iron fences or metal netting fences each of which is about 1.5 to 1.6 meters high on the east side which faces a public road; wooden posts on the north side which borders on the northern vacant lot; and iron fences each of which is about 1.85 to 2.1 meters high on the west side which borders on the SDF Camp Higashi Tachikawa, with an entrance gate with a door. The fences on the east side have openings that serve as gateways without doors leading to the northern passages of Building No. 1 to Building No. 8, the widths of which are about 7.1 meters, about 5.9 meters, about 8 meters, about 6.1 meters, about 6.3 meters, about 5 meters, about 9 meters, and about 6.1 meters, respectively. Four iron wires are strung over the wooden posts on the north side, at almost equal intervals.
(B) The site on which Building No. 9 and Building No. 10 stand is also surrounded by metal netting fences or iron fences each of which is about 1.5 to 1.7 meters high. The fences on the east and north sides that face public roads have openings that serve as gateways for the buildings, the widths of which are a few meters to about 8.2 meters, respectively, and which have no doors.

(c) Condition of the guide boards, etc. standing on the site of the Tachikawa Housing Complex
(A) Near the opening on the fences on the east side of the site of Building No. 1 to Building No. 8, which serves as a gateway leading to the northern passage of Building 1, stands a guide board entitled "Guide Map of the Tachikawa Housing Complex of the Defense Agency." Also, on the left of the openings on the fences on the east side of said site that lead to the northern passages of the respective buildings, there are warning boards covered with vinyl sheets. On each board, a white A3-sized landscape sheet of paper is attached, on which the following instructions are written vertically:
The following is prohibited within the area of the housing complex:
- Entering the area without authorization
- Posting or distributing leaflets and other propaganda activities
- Selling goods by opening stalls (occupying the land) or peddling
- Parking vehicles
- Being a nuisance to others
Managers
(B) Near the opening on the fences surrounding the site of Building No. 9 and Building No. 10 mentioned in (b)(B), which serves as a gateway for Building 9, stands the same guide board as that mentioned above, entitled "Guide Map of the Tachikawa Housing Complex of the Defense Agency." Also on the left or right of the openings on these fences that serve as gateways for the respective buildings, the same warning boards as those mentioned above are placed.

(d) Condition of each building
(A) Each of Building No. 1 to Building No. 9 has an eastern staircase, central staircase, and western staircase. On the north side of the first floor of each building, there are three gateways without doors that lead to the respective staircases. On the north side of the first floor of Building No. 10, there are four gateways without doors that lead to the eastern staircase, eastern central staircase, western central staircase, and western staircase, respectively. At these gateways, collective mailboxes are placed. In front of these staircases, there are entrances of two residential units on each floor, and a newspaper box is installed on the entrance door of each residential unit.
(B) On the notice boards placed at the gateways on the first floor of Building No. 1 to Building No. 10 or on the walls above the collective mailboxes, warning notices are put up, some covered with vinyl sheets. Each notice is a white or yellow A4-sized landscape sheet of paper, on which the same instructions as those written on the aforementioned warning boards are written vertically.

(e) Management of the Tachikawa Housing Complex
The Tachikawa Housing Complex is a housing complex established by the State as residences for the officials of the Defense Agency and their families. At the time of the incident, almost all units were occupied in Building No. 1 to Building No. 8. Under the Act on Housing Complexes for National Public Servants, Order for Enforcement of said Act and other relevant laws and regulations, the entire site as well as Building No. 5 to Building No. 8 are under the management of the Commander of the Japan Ground Self-Defense Forces (JGSDF) Camp Higashi Tachikawa, Building No. 1 to Building No. 4 are under the management of the director of the Tachikawa Branch of the First Depot of the Japan Air Self-Defense Forces (JASDF), and Building No. 9 and Building No. 10 are under the management of the Contract Department of the Defense Agency or the Third Laboratory of the Technical Research Department of said Agency.

(2) Content of the activities of the Tachikawa SDF Monitoring Tent Village
The Tachikawa SDF Monitoring Tent Village (hereinafter referred to as the "Tent Village") is a group formed on the occasion of the relocation of the SDF camp to the Tachikawa Base of the United States Forces. The group, advocating antiwar and pacifism, carries out various activities such as holding demonstrations, distributing information to the public in front of train stations, and making requests to the SDF camp. The three accused are members of the Tent Village.


→vol.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663



vol.1 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/b15bf213e32f2b439c876cb510cc5906
vol.2 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558
voi.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663
vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54

Distributing leaflets : Supreme Court found guilty

Japan Supreme Court's Second Petit Bench found three antiwar activists guilty of trespassing when they entered a housing compound of the Self-Defense Forces in Tachikawa(http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20080427a1.html).A full text of Japan Supreme Court's decision is as below.How do you think about the decision?

■　■　■ vol.1　■　■　■

Date of the judgment
2008.04.11

Case number
2005 (A) No. 2652

Reporter
Keishu Vol. 62, No. 5

Title
Judgment concerning a case where the court determined that some areas within a housing complex consisting of buildings that is used as the housing for public officials and is under the management of the managers, covering from the gateway on the first floor of each building to the front of the entrance of each residential unit, and the site of the housing complex surrounded by fences and other enclosing equipment, can be regarded as the object of the crime of breaking into the premises set forth in Article 130 of the Penal Code

Case name
Case charged for breaking into a residence

Result
Judgment of the Second Petty Bench, dismissed

Court of the Second Instance
Tokyo High Court, Judgment of December 9, 2005

Summary of the judgment
1. Some areas within the housing complex consisting of buildings that is used as the housing where public officials and their families reside and is under the management of the managers, covering from the gateway on the first floor of each building to the front of the entrance of each residential unit, and the part of the site of the housing complex, which borders on and surrounds each building and for which the managers, by placing fences and other enclosing equipment on the borders to the outside, clearly indicate that said part of the site is used for using each building as the building's annexed land, can be regarded as the "premises guarded by another person" set forth in Article 130 of the Penal Code and the enclosed land surrounding such premises, and as the object of the crime of breaking into the premises.

2. Where a person, with the intention of posting leaflets on which the person's political opinions are stated into the newspaper box installed on the entrance door of each residential unit, enters the common area of the housing complex used as the housing for public officials and their families and the site of the housing complex against the will of the managers of the housing complex, it does not contravene Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution to charge the person with the crime set forth in the first sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code for such act of entry.

References
(Concerning 1 and 2) First sentence of Article 130 of the Penal Code; (Concerning 2) Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution

Article 130 of the Penal Code
(Breaking into a Residence)
A person who, without justifiable grounds, breaks into a residence of another person or into the premises, building or vessel guarded by another person, or who refuses to leave such a place upon demand shall be punished by imprisonment with work for not more than 3 years or a fine of not more than 100,000 yen.

Article 21, paragraph (1) of the Constitution
Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed.

Main text of the judgment→2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558



vol.1 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/b15bf213e32f2b439c876cb510cc5906
vol.2 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/8df853cd075778ccf778202c4d6db558
voi.3 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/23ef4eefe83e07d1efd4092ad735b663
vol.4 http://blog.goo.ne.jp/tokyodo-2005/e/6d525bf8c7c478e7ff3f5f10b4e79f54