Nakai’s former attorney and fellow alumni.
Hidetomo Ikura, an attorney at Okano Law Office, explains the background behind the difficulty in sorting out the issues in the trial. Perhaps the two points that are not clear to the court are why the president and the managing director personally should bear the damages incurred by the company in this series of events, and why the amount is the way it is. It is actually a common practice to file a lawsuit in such a way that the basis for the claim and the amount of damages is unclear. The priority of presenting a firm stance to the public and shareholders is so great that the goal is to file a lawsuit anyway, and the overall logical development and grounds for the lawsuit are left unclear. In such cases, they may receive a rejection from the court.” Another problem is that the breach of the duty of due care (* the duty to exercise due care that is naturally required from a socially accepted or objective standpoint), which is being questioned for damages, is itself a difficult point of contention. For example, let’s take the first closed-door press conference, which was considered a problem in the series of disturbances,” he said. Even if the reputational problems caused by the press conference are the cause of the claim for damages, former President Minato, as a manager, decided that it was the best way to handle the situation at the time, so the fact that he made a mistake as a result does not necessarily mean that he violated his duty of due care and diligence. Therefore, not all failures in terms of results constitute a breach of the duty of due care. Unless there are facts such as violations of the law or internal guidelines, it is difficult to make a company pay compensation for a breach of the duty of care. In this light, I believe that the lawsuits are in part an ad-ballooning effort in response to pressure from the world and shareholders. The fact that this reality has come to light is actually a tailwind for Nakai. From the beginning, there were rumors that FMH might file a lawsuit against Nakai. However, after the riot broke out, major companies across the board stopped placing advertisements on Fuji TV because they believed that there were problems with governance on the part of FMH. Looking at the attitude of the judge this time, it would be difficult to attribute the cause of such dysfunction to Ms. Nakai personally. The report of the third-party committee established by Fuji Television also states that it was Fuji Television’s decision to continue Mr. Nakai’s performance after the riot. In other words, there is a possibility that a claim for damages against Ms. Nakai would be rejected as “unreasonable,” and the risk of being sued by FMH has been reduced considerably. In fact, the two defendants, especially Ms. Minato, are said to be growing more confident about the development of the trial. In fact, the Yamekenshi lawyer representing Mr. Minato is an alumnus of the lawyer who initially represented Mr. Nakai. Because of this relationship, Nakai may have been informed of the court case.” (Fuji TV insider) A year will soon have passed since Nakai left the public eye, but behind the scenes, it seems that moves toward his return to society are gaining momentum. It is reported that Nakai is encouraged by his fans’ voices. Needless to say, there is a “comeback boom” in the entertainment industry these days. People who left the limelight for one reason or another are returning one after another, and what they all have in common is their outstanding name recognition. Mr. Nakai’s high name recognition goes without saying. In his case, it is believed that with the support of those around him, he will first engage in social contribution activities rather than entertainment. Nakai’s “return to work” is gaining momentum. Women’s Seven, December 11, 2025 issue