不当景品類及び不当表示防止法第8条(課徴金納付命令の基本的要件)に関する考え方(暫定版)
  法令番号: 改正: 辞書バージョン:14.0 翻訳日:平成31年7月31日
Concept relating to Article 8 of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (The basic requirements concerning Payment Order for a Surcharge) (Tentative translation)
Law number: Amendment: Dictionary Ver: 14.0 Translation date: July 31, 2019


不当景品類及び不当表示防止法第8条(課徴金納付命令の基本的要件)に関する考え方(暫定版)
Concept relating to Article 8 of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (The basic requirements concerning Payment Order for a Surcharge) (Tentative translation)
不当景品類及び不当表示防止法第8条(課徴金納付命令の基本的要件)に関する考え方
Concept relating to Article 8 of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (The basic requirements concerning Payment Order for a Surcharge)
目次
Table of Contents
第1 はじめに
Section 1 Introduction
1 本考え方の目的
(1) Purpose of this concept
2 本考え方の構成
(2) Configuration of this concept
第2 優良・有利誤認表示
Section 2 Representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services
1 本法上の「表示」
(1) "Representations" in this Act
2 優良・有利誤認表示
(2) Representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services
(1) 本法第5条第1号及び第2号の規定
1. The provisions of Article 5, items (i) and (ii) of this Act
(2) 優良・有利誤認表示の意義等
2. The significance, etc. of representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services
第3 課徴金対象行為
Section 3 Acts Subject to Surcharge
第4 課徴金額の算定方法
Section 4 How the surcharges are calculated
1 「課徴金対象期間」
(1) "Subject Period"
(1) 本法第8条第2項の規定
1. The provisions of Article 8, paragraph (2) of this Act
(2) 「課徴金対象行為をした期間」
2. "The period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed"
(3) 「課徴金対象行為をやめてから最後に当該取引をした日までの期間」
3. "The time period from the time when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued to the day when the last of transaction is made"
(4) 一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置
4. Measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers
(5) 想定例
5. Hypothetical examples
2 「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」
(2) "Goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge"
3 「政令で定める方法で算定した売上額」(算定方法)
(3) "Proceeds from sales which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order" (the calculation method)
(1) 「売上額」
1. "Proceeds from sales"
(2) 「売上額」の算定方法(「政令で定める方法」)
2. The method for calculating the "Proceeds from sales" ("the method specified by Cabinet Order")
第5 「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否か
Section 5 Whether or not it is considered that Entrepreneurs "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness"
1 「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」
(1) When it is considered that Entrepreneurs "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness"
2 「課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて」
(2) Events "throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed"
3 想定例
(3) Hypothetical examples
第6 規模基準
Section 6 Criteria for the range of surcharges
第7 課徴金納付命令に関する不実証広告規制
Section 7 Restrictions on advertisements with content that is not proven concerning Payment Order for a Surcharge
不当景品類及び不当表示防止法第8条(課徴金納付命令の基本的要件)に関する考え方
Concept relating to Article 8 of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (The basic requirements concerning Payment Order for a Surcharge)
平成28年1月29日
January 29, 2016
消費者庁
Consumer Affairs Agency
第1 はじめに
Section 1 Introduction
1 本考え方の目的
(1) Purpose of this concept
不当な表示による顧客の誘引を防止するため、不当景品類及び不当表示防止法(昭和37年法律第134号。以下「本法」という。)への課徴金制度の導入等を内容とする不当景品類及び不当表示防止法の一部を改正する法律(平成26年法律第118号。以下「本改正法」といい、本法の引用に際しては本改正法施行後の条文を引用する。)が平成26年11月19日に成立し(同月27日公布)、平成28年4月1日から施行される。
In order to prevent the attraction of customers through unfair representations, the partly Revised Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (Act No. 118 of 2014, hereinafter referred to as "this Amendment Act", and articles of this Act refers to the articles in this Amendment Act which were enforced after its revision) with content including the introduction of surcharges for unfair premiums and representations for the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (Act No. 134 of 1962, hereinafter referred to as "this Act") was established on November 19, 2014, (promulgated on 27th of the same month) and took effect on April 1, 2016.
本改正法の施行に伴い、事業者が、不当な表示を禁止する本法「第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。〔略〕)」(以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)を施行日以後にしたときは、消費者庁長官は、その他の要件を満たす限り、当該事業者に対し、課徴金の納付を命じなければならないこととなる(本法第8条第1項本文。以下同項本文の規定による命令を「課徴金納付命令」という。)。
With the enforcement of this Amendment Act, if an Entrepreneur commits "an act in violation of the provisions of Article 5 of this Act (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of this Article)" (hereinafter referred to as "Acts Subject to Surcharge") after the enforcement date, then the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency can order said Entrepreneur to pay surcharges to the extent that certain other requirements are fulfilled. (The provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act. Hereinafter, an order pursuant to the provisions of said paragraph shall be referred to as a "Payment Order for a Surcharge")
そこで、本法の課徴金制度の運用の透明性及び事業者の予見可能性を確保するため、本法に基づく課徴金納付命令の基本的要件に関する考え方を示すこととする。
In order to ensure the transparency of the operation of Payment order for a Surcharge under this Act, and that foreknowledge was provided to Entrepreneurs, the concept of the basic requirements of the Payment Order for a Surcharge under this Act is shown below.
2 本考え方の構成
(2) Configuration of this concept
本考え方は、前記1の目的を踏まえ、まず、第2において、課徴金対象行為を基礎付ける不当な表示すなわち本法第5条第1号に該当する表示(以下「優良誤認表示」という。)及び同条第2号に該当する表示(以下「有利誤認表示」といい、優良誤認表示及び有利誤認表示を総称する場合は「優良・有利誤認表示」という。)の考え方を示す。
Based on the purpose described in 1 above, in this Section 2, unfair misrepresentations that lead to Acts Subject to Surcharge, i.e., a representation corresponding to Article 5, item (i) of this Act (hereinafter referred to as "representations which bring significantly superior images to goods or services") as well as the concept of the representation corresponding to the same Article, item (ii) (hereinafter referred to as "representations which bring significantly more advantageous images to goods or services", and when referring to significantly superior and significantly more advantageous in general, they are collectively referred to as "representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services").
その上で、第3以下において、課徴金納付命令の基本的要件の意義や考え方について説明するものである。具体的には、第3において課徴金対象行為、第4において課徴金額の算定方法、第5において「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否か、第6において規模基準、第7において課徴金納付命令に関する不実証広告規制の考え方を示す。
Then, in Section 3 and the following Sections, the meaning and concept of the basic requirements of Payment Order for a Surcharge will be explained. Specifically, in Section 3: Acts Subject to Surcharge, in Section 4: the method used for calculation of Acts Subject to Surcharge, in Section 5: whether or not it is considered that Entrepreneurs "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness", in Section 6: criteria for the range of the surcharges, and in Section 7: examples of the concept of Restrictions on advertisements which contents are not demonstrated regarding to Payment Orders for a Surcharge.
なお、本考え方においては必要に応じて「想定例」を掲げているが、これら「想定例」は、本法の課徴金制度の運用の透明性及び事業者の予見可能性を確保するため、仮定の行為を例示したものである。具体的な行為が課徴金納付命令に関する各要件を満たすか否かは、本法の規定に照らして個別事案ごとに判断されることに留意する必要がある。
Note that, in this concept, "hypothetical examples" are listed as necessary, and these "hypothetical examples" are suppositive cases mentioned to ensure transparency in the operation of this Act and to provide foreknowledge to Entrepreneurs. Also note that each individual case will be judged in light of the provisions of this Act regarding whether or not a specific action satisfies each requirement for Payment Order for a Surcharge.
第2 優良・有利誤認表示
Section 2 Representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services
本改正法は、優良・有利誤認表示に関する従来の規定を変更したものではないが、本改正法の施行に伴い、事業者が優良・有利誤認表示をする行為をしたとき、消費者庁長官は、その他の要件を満たす限り、その行為をした事業者に対し、課徴金の納付を命じなければならなくなることを踏まえ、本法上の「表示」(本法第2条第4項)を後記1にて確認した上で、優良・有利誤認表示について、後記2に概要を記載する。
This Amendment Act does not change the conventional provisions for representations which bring significantly superior and a significantly more advantageous images to goods or services; however, when an Entrepreneur makes a representation which brings significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services, with the enforcement of this Amendment Act, the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency is required to order the Entrepreneur who made the representation pay surcharges if other requirements are satisfied. Thus, after confirming the definition of "representations" in this Act (Article 2, paragraph (4) of this Act) in 1 below, an outline regarding representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services will be described in 2 below.
1 本法上の「表示」
(1) "Representations" in this Act
本法上の「表示」とは、「顧客を誘引するための手段として、事業者が自己の供給する商品又は役務の内容又は取引条件その他これらの取引に関する事項について行う広告その他の表示」(本法第2条第4項)であり、具体的には、次に掲げるものをいう(昭和37年公正取引委員会告示第3号)。
The word "Representation" in this Act refers to an "advertisement or any other Representations which an Entrepreneur makes as a means of inducing customers, with respect to the substance of the goods or services which the Entrepreneur supplies, or the trade terms or any other particular concerning the transaction" (Article 2, paragraph (4) of this Act), and specifically, they refer to the following forms of media: (Fair Trade Commission Public Notice No.3 of 1962):
① 商品、容器又は包装による広告その他の表示及びこれらに添付した物による広告その他の表示
(i) Advertisements and other Representations on goods, containers or packaging, and advertisements and other Representation by means of any materials attached thereto
② 見本、チラシ、パンフレット、説明書面その他これらに類似する物による広告その他の表示(ダイレクトメール、ファクシミリ等によるものを含む。)及び口頭による広告その他の表示(電話によるものを含む。)
(ii) Advertisements and other Representations by means of samples, flyers, brochures, instructional documents and similar items (including those by direct mail, facsimile, etc.) and verbal advertisements and indications (including telephone calls)
③ ポスター、看板(プラカード及び建物又は電車、自動車等に記載されたものを含む。)、ネオン・サイン、アドバルーン、その他これらに類似する物による広告及び陳列物又は実演による広告
(iii) Posters, signboards (including placards and indications described on buildings or trains, cars, etc.), neon signs, advertisement balloons, advertisements by means of other similar methods, including displays or demonstration sales
④ 新聞紙、雑誌その他の出版物、放送(有線電気通信設備又は拡声機による放送を含む。)、映写、演劇又は電光による広告
(iv) Advertisements in newspapers, magazines and other publications, advertisements via broadcasts (including broadcasts using wired telecommunication equipment or loudspeakers), via projection, or advertisements in theaters or on electric bulletin boards
⑤ 情報処理の用に供する機器による広告その他の表示(インターネット、パソコン通信等によるものを含む。)
(v) Advertisements and other Representation by means of equipment for information processing (including those on the internet and in PC communications, etc.)
このように、事業者が商品又は役務の供給の際に顧客を誘引するために利用するあらゆる表示が本法の「表示」に該当し、容器や包装上のものだけではなく、パンフレット、説明書面、ポスター、看板、インターネットを始めとして、その範囲は広範に及ぶ。口頭によるものも「表示」に該当する。
In this way, any Representation used by an Entrepreneur to attract customers within the supply of goods or services falls under the word "Representation" in this Act. Its scope is broad, including not only containers or packaging, but also on brochures, explanatory documents, posters, signboards and the internet. The verbal statement also corresponds to "Representation ".
2 優良・有利誤認表示
(2) Representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services
(1) 本法第5条第1号及び第2号の規定
1. The provisions of Article 5, items (i) and (ii) of this Act
本法第5条は、事業者に対し、「自己の供給する商品又は役務の取引」について、同条第1号から第3号までのいずれかに該当する表示をしてはならない旨を定めているところ、優良・有利誤認表示に関する同条第1号及び同条第2号の規定は次のとおりである。
Article 5 of this Act stipulates that no Entrepreneur may make a Representation as provided for under items (i) to (iii) of the Article in connection with "the transaction of goods or services which the Entrepreneur supplies". The provisions of items (i) and (ii) of the Article regarding representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services are as follows:
〔本法〕
This Act
(不当な表示の禁止)
(Prohibition of Misleading Representations)
第五条 事業者は、自己の供給する商品又は役務の取引について、次の各号のいずれかに該当する表示をしてはならない。
Article 5 No Entrepreneur may make a Representation as provided for in any one of the following items in connection with the transaction of goods or services which the Entrepreneur supplies:
一 商品又は役務の品質、規格その他の内容について、一般消費者に対し、実際のものよりも著しく優良であると示し、又は事実に相違して当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも著しく優良であると示す表示であつて、不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれがあると認められるもの
(i) Any Representation where the quality, standard or any other particular relating to the content of goods or services is portrayed to general consumers as being significantly superior to that of the actual goods or services, or are portrayed as being, contrary to fact, significantly superior to those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as those supplied by the relevant Entrepreneur, thereby being likely to induce customers unjustly and to interfere with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making;
二 商品又は役務の価格その他の取引条件について、実際のもの又は当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも取引の相手方に著しく有利であると一般消費者に誤認される表示であつて、不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれがあると認められるもの
(ii) Any Representation by which price or any other trade terms of goods or services could be misunderstood by general consumers to be significantly more advantageous than the actual goods or services, or than those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as those supplied by the relevant Entrepreneur, thereby being likely to induce customers unjustly and to interfere with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making; or
三 (略)
(iii) (omitted)
(2) 優良・有利誤認表示の意義等
2. The significance, etc. of representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services.
本法の不当な表示に関する規制は、不当な顧客の誘引を防止し、一般消費者による適正な商品又は役務の選択を確保することを目的として行われるものである。このため、特定の表示が「著しく優良であると示す」表示(又は「著しく有利である」と「誤認される」表示)に該当するか否かは、業界の慣行や表示をする事業者の認識により判断するのではなく、表示の受け手である一般消費者に、「著しく優良」(又は「著しく有利」)と誤認されるか否かという観点から判断される。
The regulations on misleading representations in this Act are intended to prevent customers from being significantly attracted to goods, and to ensure that general consumers appropriately select goods and services. Therefore, regarding the determination of whether or not a specific representation is considered as representation that is portrayed "as being significantly superior" (or is "misunderstood" to be "significantly more advantageous"), it will not be judged based on industry practices or the awareness of Entrepreneur that made the representation. Instead, it will be judged from the viewpoint of whether or not their good or service is perceived to be "significantly superior" (or "significantly more advantageous") by general consumers who receive their representation.
また、「著しく」とは、当該表示の誇張の程度が、社会一般に許容される程度を超えて、一般消費者による商品又は役務の選択に影響を与える場合をいう。
Also, "significantly" means the level of exaggeration in which a representation affects general consumers' selection of goods and services goes beyond the level generally accepted by society.
すなわち、優良誤認表示(又は有利誤認表示)とは、一般消費者に対して、社会一般に許容される誇張の程度を超えて、特定の「商品又は役務」の内容(又は取引条件)について、実際のもの等よりも著しく優良であると示す表示(又は著しく有利であると誤認される表示)である。このような表示が行われれば、一般消費者は、商品又は役務の内容(又は取引条件)について誤認することとなる。
That is, representations which bring significantly superior images (or significantly more advantageous images) to "goods or services" refer to representations that give general consumers the impression that the content (or conditions of their transactions) of a good or service is significantly better (or more advantageous) than it actually is beyond the extent of exaggeration which is generally accepted by society. If such a representation is made, general consumers could misidentify the content (or conditions of their transactions) of the good or service.
なお、「著しく優良であると示す」表示(又は「著しく有利である」と「誤認される」表示)か否かの判断に当たっては、表示上の特定の文言、図表、写真等から一般消費者が受ける印象・認識ではなく、表示内容全体から一般消費者が受ける印象・認識が基準となり、その際、事業者の故意又は過失の有無は問題とされない。
It should be noted that, in determining whether or not a representation is "portrayed" "as being significantly superior" (or "could be misunderstood" to be "significantly more advantageous"), the impression and recognition that general consumers receive from individual specific sentences, charts, photographs, etc. on good displays will not be judged. However, the impression and recognition that general consumers receive from the entire representation will be judged, and the presence or absence of intention or negligence by the Entrepreneur will not be considered.
第3 課徴金対象行為
Section 3 Acts Subject to Surcharge
課徴金対象行為とは、優良・有利誤認表示をする行為である(本法第8条第1項)。したがって、例えば、事業者が、本法第31条第1項の規定に基づく協定又は規約(以下「公正競争規約」という。)に沿った表示など、優良・有利誤認表示に該当しない表示をした場合には、課徴金対象行為は成立せず、課徴金の納付を命ずることはない。
Acts Subject to Surcharge are acts that make representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services (Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act). Therefore, for example, if an Entrepreneur makes a representation that does not fall under representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services which satisfies the agreement or rules (hereinafter referred to as the "Fair Competition Code") based on the provisions of Article 31, paragraph (1) of this Act, no Acts Subject to Surcharge will be identified, and Entrepreneur will not be ordered to pay surcharges.
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for a Surcharge)
第八条 事業者が、第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)をしたときは、内閣総理大臣は、当該事業者に対し、当該課徴金対象行為に係る課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額に百分の三を乗じて得た額に相当する額の課徴金を国庫に納付することを命じなければならない。ただし、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が次の各号のいずれかに該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき、又はその額が百五十万円未満であるときは、その納付を命ずることができない。
Article 8 (1) If an Entrepreneur has acted in violation of the provisions of Article 5 (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of the same Article; hereinafter referred to as the "Acts Subject to Surcharge"), the Prime Minister must order the Entrepreneur to pay to the National Treasury a surcharge equivalent to three percent of Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed; provided , however, that the Prime Minister may not order the payment if it is determined that the Entrepreneur was unaware that their Representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge fell under any of the following items throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, and that they are deemed to be not failing to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness, or if the amount of the surcharge is one million five hundred thousand yen or less:
一・二(略)
(i) and (ii) (omitted)
2・3(略)
(2) and (3) (omitted)
第4 課徴金額の算定方法
Section 4 How the surcharges are calculated
課徴金額は、(ア)「課徴金対象期間に取引をした」(イ)「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」の(ウ)「政令で定める方法により算定した売上額」に、3%を乗じて得た額となる(本法第8条第1項本文)。
The surcharges will be calculated by multiplying three percent to (c) the "Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order" of (b) the "goods or services" pertaining to "the Acts Subject to Surcharge" (a) "transacted during the subject period". (Provisions of Article 8, Paragraph (1) of this Act).
そこで、以下では、課徴金額算定の基礎となる「売上額」を算定するに当たり必要な要素である、(ア)「課徴金対象期間」、(イ)「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」、(ウ)「政令で定める方法により算定した売上額」について説明する。
Therefore, the following items are necessary to calculate the "Proceeds from sales", which is the basis of the calculation of the surcharges: (a) The "subject period", (b) The "goods or services" pertaining to "the Acts Subject to Surcharge", and (c) The "proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order".
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 事業者が、第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)をしたときは、内閣総理大臣は、当該事業者に対し、当該課徴金対象行為に係る課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額に百分の三を乗じて得た額に相当する額の課徴金を国庫に納付することを命じなければならない。ただし、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が次の各号のいずれかに該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき、又はその額が百五十万円未満であるときは、その納付を命ずることができない。
Article 8 (1) If an Entrepreneur has acted in violation of the provisions of Article 5 (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of the same Article; hereinafter referred to as the "Acts Subject to Surcharge"), the Prime Minister must order the Entrepreneur to pay to the National Treasury a surcharge equivalent to three percent of Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed; provided, however, that the Prime Minister may not order the payment if it is determined that the Entrepreneur was unaware that their Representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge fell under any of the following items throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, and that they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness, or if the amount of the surcharge is one million five hundred thousand yen or less:
一・二(略)
(i) and (ii) (omitted)
2・3(略)
(2) and (3) (omitted)
1 「課徴金対象期間」
(1) "Subject Period"
(1) 本法第8条第2項の規定
1. The provisions of Article 8, paragraph (2) of this Act
本法第8条第2項は、「課徴金対象期間」について、以下の(ⅰ)又は(ⅱ)の期間であるとしつつ、当該期間が3年を超えるときは、当該期間の末日から遡って3年間であると定めている。
Article 8, paragraph (2) of this Act stipulates that the "Subject Period" as stated in (i) or (ii) below, and if the term exceeds three years, it will be a period of retroactive three years starting from the last day of the term.
(ⅰ)原則:「課徴金対象行為をした期間」(後記(2)参照)
(i) Principle: "The period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed" (see (2) below)
(ⅱ)課徴金対象行為を「やめた日」から①6か月を経過する日、又は、②「不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれを解消するための措置として内閣府令で定める措置」(以下「一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置」という。)をとった日のいずれか早い日までの間に、当該「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引をした」場合:課徴金対象行為をした期間に、当該「課徴金対象行為をやめてから最後に当該取引をした日までの期間」を加えた期間(後記(3)及び(4)参照)
(ii) When an Entrepreneur makes transactions for goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge before the earlier of "the day" on which a period of (i) six months has elapsed after the Acts Subject to Surcharge are "discontinued", or (ii) "Measures determined by Cabinet Office Order to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, unjustly inducing customers and interfering with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making" (hereinafter referred to as "Measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers") from "discontinuation", then "the period from the time when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued to the day when the last of the transaction is made" will be added to the period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed (see postscript (3) and (4))
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 (略)
Article 8 (1) (omitted)
2 前項に規定する「課徴金対象期間」とは、課徴金対象行為をした期間(課徴金対象行為をやめた後そのやめた日から六月を経過する日(同日前に、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれを解消するための措置として内閣府令で定める措置をとつたときは、その日)までの間に当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引をしたときは、当該課徴金対象行為をやめてから最後に当該取引をした日までの期間を加えた期間とし、当該期間が三年を超えるときは、当該期間の末日から遡つて三年間とする。)をいう。
(2) The "Subject Period" as prescribed in the preceding paragraph means the period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed (if the Entrepreneur makes transactions of goods or services through the Acts Subject to Surcharge between the day when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued and the day on which a period of six months has elapsed after the discontinuation thereof (or the day on which the Entrepreneur takes measures prescribed by Cabinet Office Order as measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, unjustly inducing customers and interfering with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making, if the Entrepreneur does so prior to the day), the time period from the time when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued to the day when the last of the transactions is made is to be added to the Subject Period and if this period exceeds three years, the Subject Period is to retroactively start three years from the last day of this period.).
3 (略)
(3) (omitted)
(2) 「課徴金対象行為をした期間」
2. "The period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed"
「課徴金対象行為をした期間」とは、事業者が課徴金対象行為(優良・有利誤認表示をする行為)を始めた日からやめた日までの期間である。
"The period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed" is the period from the day when Acts Subjects to Surcharge started to be committed by Entrepreneur (making representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services) to the day when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued.
このうち、課徴金対象行為を「やめた日」に該当する日としては、例えば、事業者が、特定の商品の内容について著しく優良であると示す表示を内容とするウェブサイトを公開し続けた場合の当該公開行為終了日が挙げられる。また、当該行為を終了していない場合であっても、当該事業者が、課徴金対象行為に係る商品の内容を変更することにより、表示内容と一致させたと認められる場合には、当該変更日が課徴金対象行為を「やめた日」に該当する。
For example, if an Entrepreneur publishes information on their website indicating that the content of a particular good is significantly superior, then "the day" when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are "discontinued" refers to the day when they stop publishing said information on their website. In addition, even if Entrepreneur does not stop committing said act, if it is considered that Entrepreneur has made their representation true by changing the content of the good pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, then the day that they changed said content is considered "the day" when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are "discontinued"
(3) 「課徴金対象行為をやめてから最後に当該取引をした日までの期間」
3. "The time period from the time when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued to the day when the last of transaction is made"
本法第8条第2項は、課徴金額の算定に当たり、課徴金対象行為に係る表示により生じた「不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれ」が存続する期間を、課徴金対象行為をやめた後(一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとらない限り)最長6か月とみなし、当該期間のうち「最後に当該取引をした日までの期間」も、課徴金対象期間に含めることとしている。
Regarding the calculation of surcharges, Article 8, paragraph (2) of this Act stipulates that the period during which "thereby being likely to induce customers unjustly and to interfere with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making" caused by representations with respect to Acts Subject to Surcharge will remain for up to six months after the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued (unless they take measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers), and "the time period until the day when the last of the transactions is made" should also be included in the subject periods.
なお、この「最後に当該取引をした日までの期間」とは、当該課徴金対象行為を「やめた日」から①6か月を経過する日又は②一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとった日のいずれか早い日までの間に、最後に課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引をした日までの期間である。
In addition, "the time period" until "to the day when the last of the transaction is made" starts from "the day" when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are "discontinued", and finishes on the day they complete their last transactions for goods or services with respect to their Acts Subject to Surcharge up to the earlier of: (i)"the day" on which a period of six months has elapsed after the day when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are "discontinued" or (ii) the day "after the discontinuation" and start taking measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers.
例えば、事業者が課徴金対象行為をやめた日から一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとらないまま9か月間課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引を継続したとしても、課徴金対象行為をやめた日から6か月を経過する日が課徴金対象期間の終期となる(9か月を経過した日が終期となるのではない。)。
For example, an Entrepreneur stops committing Acts Subject to Surcharge, but they continue making transactions of goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge for nine months afterward without taking any measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers, then in this case the subject periods would end when the day on which a period of six months has elapsed after the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued (and not the day after nine months had passed).
(4) 一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置
4. Measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers
一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置とは、事業者が、課徴金対象行為に係る表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当する表示であることを、時事に関する事項を掲載する日刊新聞紙に掲載する方法その他の不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれを解消する相当な方法により一般消費者に周知する措置をいう(不当景品類及び不当表示防止法施行規則(平成28年内閣府令第6号)第8条)。
The measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers refer to the following actions: when an Entrepreneur informs general consumers using appropriate methods, such as putting out an advertisement in a daily newspaper which publishes current affairs in which they state that their representation was subject to surcharges which fall under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act, along with measures to eliminate significantly inducing customers and interfering with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making (Article 8 of the Regulation for Enforcement of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (Cabinet Office Order No. 6, 2016)).
課徴金対象行為に係る表示方法、表示内容や行為態様等は個別事案により多様であるため、当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示から生じる「不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれ」を解消するため相当と認められる方法は個別事案によって異なるが、少なくとも、「一般消費者に周知する措置」である必要がある点に留意する必要がある。
The methods, content or actions for representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge vary depending on each individual case, so appropriate methods to eliminate "the risks of unjustly inducing customers and interfering with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making" caused by Acts Subject to Surcharge also vary depending on each individual case. However, note that at least it needs to be "measures to make it common knowledge to general consumers".
〔不当景品類及び不当表示防止法施行規則〕
[Regulation for Enforcement of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations]
(法第八条第二項に規定する内閣府令で定める措置)
(Measures Prescribed by Cabinet Office Order Provided for in Article 8, Paragraph (2) of the Act)
第八条 法第八条第二項に規定する内閣府令で定める措置は、課徴金対象行為に係る表示が同条第一項ただし書各号のいずれかに該当することを時事に関する事項を掲載する日刊新聞紙に掲載する方法その他の不当に顧客を誘引し、一般消費者による自主的かつ合理的な選択を阻害するおそれを解消する相当な方法により一般消費者に周知する措置とする。
Article 8 The measures prescribed by Cabinet Office Order that are provided for in Article 8, paragraph (2) of the Act are measures to make it common knowledge to general consumers that a representation involved in an Act Subject to Surcharge falls under one of the items of the proviso to paragraph (1) of that Article, through publication in a daily newspaper that publish information about current events or by any other appropriate means that eliminates the risk of unjustly inducing customers and interfering with general consumers' voluntary and rational choice-making.
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 (略)
Article 8 (1) (omitted)
一 商品又は役務の品質、規格その他の内容について、実際のものよりも著しく優良であること又は事実に相違して当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも著しく優良であることを示す表示
(i) Any Representation where the quality, standard or any other particular relating to the content of goods or services is portrayed as being significantly superior to that of the actual goods or services, or are portrayed as being, contrary to fact, significantly superior to those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as those supplied by the relevant Entrepreneur; or
二 商品又は役務の価格その他の取引条件について、実際のものよりも取引の相手方に著しく有利であること又は事実に相違して当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも取引の相手方に著しく有利であることを示す表示
(ii) Any Representation indicating that the price and other trade terms for goods or services are significantly more favorable to the other party in a transaction than they actually are, or that, contrary to fact, they are significantly more advantageous to the other party in a transaction than those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as the relevant Entrepreneur.
2・3(略)
(2) and (3) (omitted)
(5) 想定例
5. Hypothetical examples
事業者が、課徴金対象行為をやめた日より後に課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引をしていない場合は、「課徴金対象期間」は「課徴金対象行為をした期間」と同一期間となる。
If an Entrepreneur does not make transactions of goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge after the day when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued, then "the subject periods" shall be the same period as "the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed".
他方、事業者が課徴金対象行為をやめた日より後に課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の取引をした場合は、課徴金対象行為をやめた日から6か月を経過する日又は一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとった日のいずれか早い日までの間においていつまで取引をしていたか否かによって、課徴金対象期間が異なることとなる。
On the other hand, if Entrepreneur makes transactions of goods or services pertaining to the act subject of surcharges after the day when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued, then the Subject Period will vary depending on the amount of time they continued making those transactions. It will be the amount of time earlier between the day on which a period of six months has elapsed after the Acts Subject to Surcharge are discontinued, or the day they took measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers.
以下の想定例では、必要に応じて、それぞれの場合に応じた説明をする。
In the following hypothetical examples, explanations will be made according to each case as necessary.
なお、各想定例における「課徴金対象行為をした期間」は、各事業者が課徴金対象行為を毎日行っていない場合(例えば、週に1回行っていた場合、月に1回行っていた場合)であっても、異なるものではない。
In addition, "The period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed " will not change even if an Entrepreneur does not commit Acts Subject to Surcharge every day (for example, if they just commit an act once a week, or once a month).
① 商品aを製造する事業者Aが、小売業者を通じて一般消費者に対して供給する商品aの取引に際して、商品aについて優良誤認表示を内容とする包装をし、その包装がされた商品aを、平成30年4月1日から同年9月30日までの間、毎日小売業者に対し販売して引き渡した場合、事業者Aの課徴金対象行為をした期間は、平成30年4月1日から同年9月30日までとなる(小売業者の一般消費者に対する販売行為は、事業者Aの行為ではない。なお、当該小売業者が事業者Aとともに当該優良誤認表示の内容の決定に関与していた場合は、当該小売業者が一般消費者に対して商品aを販売して引き渡す行為について、別途課徴金対象行為の該当性が問題となる。)。
(i) If Entrepreneur A that manufactures and provides Good a to general consumers creates packaging with representations which bring a significantly superior image to a good a upon their transactions via a retailer, and Entrepreneur A distributes and sells Good a with said packaging to a retailer between April 1, 2018 and September 30, 2018, then the period during which the Acts Subject to Surcharge that Entrepreneur A are committed would be from April 1, 2018 to September 30, 2018 (The retailer's sales to general consumers are not considered as acts performed by Entrepreneur A. However, if said retailer is involved with Entrepreneur A in the creation of the content of the representations which bring significantly superior images to goods or services, then the retailer would be separately questioned on whether or not the act of selling and delivering the good to general consumers falls under Acts Subject to Surcharge for them as well.)
事業者Aは、課徴金対象行為をやめた日の翌日である平成30年10月1日以降は商品aの取引をしていないため、課徴金対象期間は、平成30年4月1日から同年9月30日までとなる。
Since Entrepreneur A stopped making transactions of good a after October 1, 2018, which is the following day after they stopped committing the Acts Subject to Surcharge, the subject periods would be from April 1, 2018 up to September 30, 2018.
② 事業者Bが、自ら直接一般消費者に対して販売する商品bの取引に際して、商品bについて有利誤認表示を内容とするチラシを、自ら平成30年10月1日から平成31年3月31日までの間配布した場合、事業者Bの課徴金対象行為をした期間は、平成30年10月1日から平成31年3月31日までとなる。
(ii) If Entrepreneur B makes transactions of Good b and sells it directly to general consumers and they distribute fliers which include representations which bring a significantly more advantageous image to the Good b from October 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019, then Entrepreneur B's period during which their Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed would be from October 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019.
事業者Bが、平成31年4月1日以降は商品bの取引をしなかった場合、課徴金対象期間は平成30年10月1日から平成31年3月31日までとなる。
If Entrepreneur B does not make transactions of Good b after April 1, 2019, then the subject period would be from October 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019.
③ 事業者Cが、自ら直接一般消費者に対して販売する商品cの取引に際して、商品cについて優良誤認表示を内容とするポスターを平成31年4月1日から同年9月30日までの間自己の店舗内及び店頭に掲示した場合、事業者Cの課徴金対象行為をした期間は、平成31年4月1日から同年9月30日までとなる。
(iii) If Entrepreneur C puts up posters with representations which bring a significantly superior image to their Good c in their store or at their storefront from April 1, 2019 to September 30, 2019, then upon directly selling their Good c to general consumers, the period during which the Entrepreneur C's Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed would be from April 1, 2019 to September 30, 2019.
事業者Cが、平成31年10月1日以降、一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとらないまま、商品cの取引を継続し、最後に取引をした日が平成31年12月31日であった場合、課徴金対象期間は平成31年4月1日から同年12月31日までとなる。
If Entrepreneur C, after October 1, 2019, continues making transactions of Good c without taking measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers, and the date they make their last transaction is December 31, 2019, then the subject period would be from April 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019.
④ 事業者Dが、自ら直接一般消費者に対して販売する商品dの取引に際して、商品dについて優良誤認表示を内容とするテレビコマーシャルを平成31年10月1日から同月31日までの間テレビ放送局に放送させた場合、事業者Dの課徴金対象行為をした期間は、平成31年10月1日から同月31日までとなる。
(iv) If Entrepreneur D makes a TV broadcaster to run TV commercials with representations which bring a significantly superior image to their Good d from October 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019, then upon directly selling Good d to general consumers, the period during which the Entrepreneur D's Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed would be from October 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019.
事業者Dが、平成31年11月1日以降、一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとらないまま、商品dの取引を継続し、平成32年4月30日に取引をした上で、最後に取引をした日が平成32年8月31日であった場合、課徴金対象期間は、平成31年10月1日から平成32年4月30日(課徴金対象行為をやめてから6か月経過日までの最後の取引日)までとなる。
If Entrepreneur D continues making transactions of Good d after November 1, 2019 without taking measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers, and they continue to make transactions through April 30, 2020, finishing their last transaction on August 31, 2020, then the subject period would be from October 1, 2019 to April 30, 2020 (Up to the day they made their last transaction during the six month period in which they stopped their Acts Subject to Surcharge).
⑤ 事業者Eが、自ら直接一般消費者に対して販売する商品eの取引に際して、商品eについて有利誤認表示を内容とするウェブサイトを平成31年11月1日から平成32年4月30日までの間公開した場合、事業者Eの課徴金対象行為をした期間は、平成31年11月1日から平成32年4月30日までとなる。
(v) If Entrepreneur E publishes information on their website which includes representations which brings a significantly more advantageous image to their Good e towards general consumers from November 1st, 2019 to April 30, 2020, then the period during which the Entrepreneur E's Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed would be from November 1st, 2019 to April 30, 2020.
事業者Eが平成32年5月1日以降も商品eの取引を継続し(同年7月31日にも取引をしていた。)、最後に取引をした日が平成34年9月30日であったが、平成32年7月31日に一般消費者の誤認のおそれの解消措置をとっていた場合、課徴金対象期間は、平成31年11月1日から平成32年7月31日までとなる。
If Entrepreneur E continues to make transactions for Good e after May 1, 2020 (Including making transactions on July 31, 2020), and their last transaction is made on September 30, 2022, but they took measures to eliminate the risk of misunderstood Representations against general consumers on July 31, 2020, then the subject period would be from November 1, 2019 to July 31, 2020.
2 「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」
(2) "Goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge"
課徴金対象行為は優良・有利誤認表示をする行為であるから、「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」は、優良・有利誤認表示をする行為の対象となった商品又は役務である。その「商品又は役務」は、課徴金対象行為に係る表示内容や当該行為態様等に応じて個別事案ごとに異なるものであるから、全ての場合を想定して論じることはできないが、以下、「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」に関する考え方の例を記載することとする。
Since Acts Subject to Surcharge are acts of displaying representations which cause significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services, the "goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge" refer to the goods or services which include representations which bring significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to goods or services to them. The "goods or services" are different for each individual case according to the content of the displays related to the Acts Subject to Surcharge or the manner of actions, etc., so it cannot be discussed in a one-case-fits-all manner. However, we will describe some examples to show the thinking process regarding the "goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge".
(1) 全国(又は特定地域)において供給する商品又は役務であっても、具体的な表示の内容や実際に優良・有利誤認表示をした地域といった事情から、一部の地域や店舗において供給した当該商品又は役務が「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」となることがある。
1. Even in cases in which goods or services are supplied nationwide (or in specific areas), the goods or services supplied only in certain areas or stores may be "goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge" due to the specific content of the representation or the area where the representation or the area where the representation which causes significantly superior and significantly more advantageous images to their goods or services is made.
<想定例>
① 事業者Aが、自ら全国において運営する複数の店舗においてうなぎ加工食品aを一般消費者に販売しているところ、平成30年4月1日から同年11月30日までの間、北海道内で配布した「北海道版」と明記したチラシにおいて、当該うなぎ加工食品について「国産うなぎ」等と記載することにより、あたかも、当該うなぎ加工食品に国産うなぎを使用しているかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、同期間を通じ、外国産のうなぎを使用していた事案
(i) If we assume Entrepreneur A sells Processed Eel Food Item a to general consumers at several stores nationwide which Entrepreneur A operates, and they distribute flyers within Hokkaido which state that their processed eel food item uses domestically produced eels, along with a statement advertising a "Hokkaido version" from April 1, 2018 to November 30, 2018, and their representation indicates they use domestically caught eels for their processed eel food item, however, they use eels that were caught in foreign countries;
事業者Aの課徴金対象行為に係る商品は、事業者Aが北海道内の店舗において販売する当該うなぎ加工食品となる。
then, the good of Entrepreneur A pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge would be the processed eel food item that Entrepreneur A sold at their stores in Hokkaido.
② 事業者Bが、自ら東京都内で運営する10店舗において振り袖bを一般消費者に販売しているところ、平成30年9月1日から同年11月30日までの間、東京都内で配布したチラシにおいて、当該振り袖について「○○店、××店、△△店限定セール実施!通常価格50万円がセール価格20万円!」(○○店、××店、△△店は東京都内にある店舗)等と記載することにより、あたかも、実売価格が「通常価格」と記載した価格に比して安いかのように表示をしていたものの、実際には、「通常価格」と記載した価格は、事業者Bが任意に設定した架空の価格であって、○○店、××店、△△店において販売された実績のないものであった事案
(ii) If we assume Entrepreneur B sells Furisode b (a Kimono) to general consumers in 10 stores that they operate themselves in Tokyo, and they distribute flyers from September 1, 2018 to November 30, 2018, and a statement in the flyers describes the furisode as "Being limited to ** store, xx store, and __ store! Our regular price of 500,000 yen will be discounted to 200,000 yen in a sale!" The statement ("** store, xx store and __ store, which are located in Tokyo), etc. makes it look as if the sale price is lower than the price described as "the regular price". However, in this example, the price indicated as "the regular price" is actually a fictitious price arbitrarily set by Entrepreneur B, and there are no records that the good was previously sold at any of the ** shop, xx shop, or __ shop.
事業者Bの課徴金対象行為に係る商品は、事業者Bが東京都内の○○店、××店、△△店において販売する当該振り袖となる。
The goods pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge for Entrepreneur B would be the furisode which Entrepreneur B sold at ** shop, xx shop, and __ shop in Tokyo.
(2) 事業者が、自己の供給する商品又は役務を構成する一部分の内容や取引条件について問題となる表示をした場合において、(当該商品又は役務の一部分が別の商品又は役務として独立の選択〔取引〕対象となるか否かにかかわらず)その問題となる表示が、商品又は役務の一部分ではなく商品又は役務そのものの選択に影響を与えるときには、(当該商品又は役務の一部分でなく)当該商品又は役務が「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」となる。
2. In the event that an Entrepreneur displays a questionable representation about the content and transaction conditions of part of a good or service supplied by itself, (regardless that that part of the good or service may be independently selected (transacted) as another good or service in a transaction), when the questionable display affects a consumer's selection of the good or service itself rather than a part thereof (instead of the part of said good or service), the entire good or service would be "goods or services related to the Acts Subject to Surcharge".
<想定例>
① 事業者Cが、自ら運営するレストラン1店舗においてコース料理cを一般消費者に提供するに当たり、平成31年1月10日から同年12月28日までの間、当該料理について、「松阪牛ステーキを堪能できるコース料理」等との記載があるウェブサイトを公開することにより、あたかも、当該コース料理中のステーキに松阪牛を使用しているかのように表示をしていたものの、実際には、同期間を通じ、松阪牛ではない国産の牛肉を使用していた事案
(i) If Entrepreneur C offers Course Dish c to general consumers in a restaurant operated by themselves between January 10, 2019 and December 28, 2019, and they publish information about the course dish on their website stating that "customers can enjoy Matsusaka beef steak", etc., which makes it look as if they use Matsusaka beef for the steak in their course dish. However, during said period they actually use a domestic beef which was not Matsusaka beef.
当該ウェブサイトでの表示は、一般消費者による当該コース料理の選択に影響を与えることとなるから、事業者Cの課徴金対象行為に係る役務(料理)は、「松阪牛ステーキを堪能できるコース料理」と示して提供した当該コース料理となる。
then, since the information on their website affects general consumers' selection of their course dishes, the service (the course dishes) pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge performed by Entrepreneur C would be the course dishes which were described as being "Course dishes in which you can enjoy Matsusaka beef steak".
② 事業者Dが、自ら運営する旅館1軒において宿泊役務dを一般消費者に提供するに当たり、平成33年4月1日から平成34年3月31日までの間、当該宿泊役務について、「一番人気!肉食系集合!!松阪牛ステーキ宿泊プラン」等との記載があるウェブサイトを公開することにより、あたかも、当該宿泊役務の利用者に提供する料理に松阪牛を使用しているかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、同期間を通じ、松阪牛ではない国産の牛肉を使用していた
(ii) If Entrepreneur D offers Accommodation Service d to general consumers in a hotel run by themselves from April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022, and they describe information about their accommodation service on their website by stating "This is our most popular plan! Calling all beef lovers to our hotel! Matsusaka beef steak lodging plan", etc., then by displaying such information, the hotel makes it look as if they use Matsusaka beef in dishes served to lodgers at their hotel. However, in fact, throughout the advertised period they use domestic beef that is not Matsusaka beef.
事案当該ウェブサイトでの表示は、一般消費者による当該宿泊役務の選択に影響を与えることとなるから、事業者Dの課徴金対象行為に係る役務は、「松阪牛ステーキ」と示して提供した料理を含む当該宿泊役務となる。
Since said display on the website affects the general consumers' selection of the accommodation service, the Acts Subject to Surcharge would be the accommodation service of Entrepreneur D who provided domestic beef steak but indicated it as "Matsusaka beef steak".
(3) 「課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務」は、具体的に「著しく優良」と示された(「著しく有利」と誤認される)商品又は役務に限られる。
3. A "Good or service pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge" is limited to a good or service specifically marked as "significantly superior" (misrecognized as "significantly more advantageous") but is actually contrary to the fact.
<想定例>
① 事業者Eが、自ら運営するレストラン1店舗において料理を一般消費者に提供するに当たり、平成30年7月1日から平成31年12月31日までの間、同店舗内に設置したメニューにおいて、当該料理について、「松阪牛すき焼き」等と記載することにより、あたかも、記載された料理に松阪牛を使用しているかのように表示をしていたものの、実際には、平成30年7月14日から平成31年12月31日までの間、松阪牛ではない国産の牛肉を使用していた事案
(i) If Entrepreneur E provides Dish e to general consumers at a restaurant that they themselves operate, and in their restaurant menus from July 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019, a dish is described as "Matsusaka beef sukiyaki", etc. which makes it seem as if Matsusaka beef is used in the dish. However, in fact, they use domestic beef other than Matsusaka beef from July 14, 2018 to December 31, 2019,
事業者Eの課徴金対象行為に係る役務(料理)は、事業者Eが松阪牛を使用していないにもかかわらず松阪牛すき焼きと示して提供した当該すき焼き料理となる(事業者Eが平成30年7月1日から同月13日までの間に実際に松阪牛を使用して提供したすきやき料理は課徴金対象行為に係る役務(料理)とならない。)。
then, Entrepreneur E's service (cooking) pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge would be the sukiyaki dish that they served while indicating it as "Matsusaka beef Sukiyaki" but in fact did not use Matusaka beef. (The sukiyaki dishes that Entrepreneur E provided using actual Matsusaka beef from July 1st, 2018 to July 13th, 2018 would not correspond to the service (cooking) subject to surcharges).
② 事業者Fが、自ら全国において運営する複数の店舗においてスーツを一般消費者に販売するに当たり、平成30年3月1日から同年6月30日までの間、テレビコマーシャルにおいて、当該スーツについて、「スーツ全品半額」等との文字を使用した映像、「スーツ全品半額」等との音声をテレビ放送局に放送させることにより、あたかも、事業者Fが全店舗において販売するスーツの全てが表示価格の半額で販売されているかのように表示をしていたものの、実際には、表示価格2万円未満のスーツは半額対象外であった事案
(ii) If Entrepreneur F sells business suits to general consumers at multiple stores that they operate nationwide from March 1, 2018 to June 30, 2018, and they advertise in television commercials with digital lettering that states "Half price for all business suit items", along with audio stating "Half price for all business suit items" and they use a TV broadcaster to run the TV commercial, which makes it seem as if all the business suits that Entrepreneur F sells at all of their stores are offered at half price from the listed price, but in fact, business suits that cost less than 20,000 yen are not sold at half price;
事業者Fの課徴金対象行為に係る商品は、事業者Fが全店舗において販売するスーツ商品のうち、半額対象外であるにもかかわらず半額と示した表示価格2万円未満のスーツとなる(実際に半額対象であった表示価格2万円以上のスーツは課徴金対象行為に係る商品とならない。)。
then, the goods pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge for Entrepreneur F would be the business suits with a listed price of less than 20,000 yen which were indicated as being half price, but in fact were not sold at half price. (Business suits with a display price of 20,000 yen or more, which were actually sold at half price, would not be goods pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge).
3 「政令で定める方法で算定した売上額」(算定方法)
(3) "Proceeds from sales which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order" (the calculation method)
(1) 「売上額」
1. "Proceeds from sales"
課徴金額算定の基礎となる、課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の「売上額」は、事業者の事業活動から生ずる収益から費用を差し引く前の数値(消費税相当額も含む。)を意味する。
The "Proceeds from sales" of the goods or services pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge, which is the basis for the calculation of surcharges, means the figures (including relevant consumption tax amounts) before costs are deducted from the revenue generated from the business activities of the Entrepreneur.
また、この「売上額」は、事業者の直接の取引先に対する売上額のことであり、当該「売上額」は、必ずしも事業者の一般消費者に対する直接の売上額のみに限られるものではない。
In addition, this "Proceeds from sales" is the proceeds from sales which they have sold directly to their clients; thus, the "Proceeds from sales" is not necessarily limited to direct sales to Entrepreneur's general consumers.
例えば、自ら特定の商品を製造する事業者が、同商品について優良誤認表示をした場合において、その商品の流通経路として、当該製造事業者が一般消費者に対して直接販売する経路のほか、当該製造事業者が卸売業者や小売業者等を介して一般消費者に販売する経路があるときには、当該製造事業者から一般消費者に対する直接の販売額のみならず、当該卸売業者や小売業者等に対する販売額も、課徴金算定の基礎となる「売上額」に含まれる。
For example, if an Entrepreneur itself manufactures a specific good and makes representations which bring significantly superior images to their goods, and it has a channel to sell to general consumers through wholesalers or retailers, etc., in addition to a channel that Entrepreneur has to directly sell to general consumers, then not only the amount of their direct sales to general consumers, but also the amount of their sales to wholesalers and retailers, etc. are included in the "Proceeds from sales" that is the basis for calculating surcharges.
なお、課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務のうち、「役務」の「売上額」については、事業者が提供する役務の内容に応じて異なることとなるが、例えば、①住宅建築請負工事や住宅リフォーム工事については工事役務の対価である工事代金、②電気通信役務については通信役務の対価である通信料金、③不動産仲介については仲介役務の対価である仲介手数料、④物品運送については運送役務の対価である運賃、⑤保険については保険の引受けの対価である保険料が、それぞれ「売上額」となる。
Note that among the goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, the "Proceeds from sales" for "services" differs depending on the content of the service provided by Entrepreneur; we will explain what corresponds to the "Proceeds from sales" in some cases: (i) Construction fees which are the compensation for construction services, for example with housing construction work or housing renovation work, (ii) Communication charges which are compensation for communication services, such as telecommunications services, (iii) Real estate brokerage charges that are the fees for brokerage services, for example with real-estate brokerage services, (iv) Transport costs that are the compensation for transport services, as in cases involving the delivery of goods and (v) Premiums that are the compensation for insurance services, such as for any type of insurance.
(2) 「売上額」の算定方法(「政令で定める方法」)
2. The method for calculating the "Proceeds from sales" ("the method prescribed by Cabinet Order")
課徴金額算定の基礎となる「売上額」は、後記アのとおり算定した総売上額から、後記イの控除項目の合計額を控除して算定する(不当景品類及び不当表示防止法施行令(平成21年政令第218号。以下「本政令」という。)第1条、第2条)。
The "Proceeds from sales", which is the basis for calculating the amount of the surcharges, should be calculated by deducting the total amount of the items stated in (B) below from the total Proceeds from sales calculated as stated in (A) below ((Decree No. 218 of 2009. Hereinafter referred to as "this Cabinet Order") Article 1 and Article 2).
ア 総売上額の算定
(jj) Calculation of the total Proceeds from sales
(ア)総売上額は、原則として、課徴金対象期間において引き渡された又は提供された、課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の対価を合計する方法(引渡基準)によって算定する(本政令第1条)。
(a) In principle, the total Proceeds from sales should be calculated based on the method (the basis for transactions) by totaling the receivables of the goods or services delivered or provided during the subject period which pertains to the Acts Subject to Surcharge (Article 1 of this Cabinet Order).
(イ)ただし、課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の対価がその販売又は提供に関する契約を締結する際に定められる場合であって、引渡基準により算定した額と、当該課徴金対象期間において締結した契約額を合計する方法(契約基準)により算定した額の間に著しい差異を生ずる事情があると認められるときは、契約基準によって算定する(本政令第2条)。
(b) However, if the receivables from the goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge are determined when entering into a contract for its sale or provision, and it is deemed that there is a significant difference between the amount calculated by the basis for transactions and the one calculated by the method of totaling the contracted amounts determined in the subject period (the basis for contracts), then the Proceeds from sales must be calculated based on the basis for contracts (Article 2 of this Cabinet Order).
契約基準を用いるべき、「課徴金対象行為…に係る商品又は役務の対価がその販売又は提供に係る契約の締結の際に定められる場合において、課徴金対象期間において引き渡した商品又は提供した役務の対価の額の合計額と課徴金対象期間において締結した契約により定められた商品の販売又は役務の提供の対価の額の合計額との間に著しい差異を生ずる事情があると認められるとき」(本政令第2条第1項)に該当するか否かについては、実際に両方の方法で額を計算し、その額に著しい差異が生じたか否かによってではなく、そのような著しい差異が生じる蓋然性が類型的又は定性的に認められるか否かによって判断する。
Upon using the basis for contracts, regarding whether or not the case falls under "the consideration for goods or services associated with Acts Subject to Surcharge ... is established at the time of entry into an agreement for their sale or provision and circumstances are found to exist that cause a significant difference between the total amount of consideration for goods delivered or services provided during the Subject Period and the total amount of consideration for the sales of goods or provision of services established in agreements entered into during the Subject Period" (Article 2, paragraph (1) of this Cabinet Order) , it will be determined whether or not the probability of such a significant difference is recognized frequently or qualitatively, regardless of the differences between the amounts calculated by each method are large or not.
例えば、課徴金対象行為に係る商品が新築戸建分譲住宅であるときのように契約から引渡しまでに長期間を要するような場合には、契約基準を用いることがあると考えられる。
For example, the basis for contracts may be used when it takes a long time between entering into a contract and the delivery of its content, as in the case where the good pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge is a newly-built private house.
〔本政令〕
[This Cabinet Order]
(法第八条第一項に規定する政令で定める売上額の算定の方法)
(Method Prescribed by Cabinet Order for Calculating Proceeds from Sales as Provided in Article 8, Paragraph (1) of the Act)
第一条 不当景品類及び不当表示防止法(以下「法」という。)第八条第一項に規定する政令で定める売上額の算定の方法は、次条に定めるものを除き、法第八条第二項に規定する課徴金対象期間(以下単に「課徴金対象期間」という。)において引き渡した商品又は提供した役務の対価の額を合計する方法とする。この場合において、次の各号に掲げる場合に該当するときは、当該各号に定める額を控除するものとする。
Article 1 The method prescribed by Cabinet Order for calculating the Proceeds from sales as provided in Article 8, paragraph (1) of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), is to aggregate the amounts of consideration for the goods delivered or services provided during the Subject Period prescribed in Article 8, paragraph (2) of the Act (hereinafter referred to simply as the "Subject Period"), excluding those prescribed in the following Article. In this, if any of the following items apply, the amount prescribed in that item is to be deducted:
一~三(略)
(i) to (iii) (omitted)
第二条 法第八条第一項に規定する課徴金対象行為(以下単に「課徴金対象行為」という。)に係る商品又は役務の対価がその販売又は提供に係る契約の締結の際に定められる場合において、課徴金対象期間において引き渡した商品又は提供した役務の対価の額の合計額と課徴金対象期間において締結した契約により定められた商品の販売又は役務の提供の対価の額の合計額との間に著しい差異を生ずる事情があると認められるときは、同項に規定する売上額の算定の方法は、課徴金対象期間において締結した契約により定められた商品の販売又は役務の提供の対価の額を合計する方法とする。
Article 2 (1) If the consideration for goods or services associated with an Act Subject to Surcharge as prescribed in Article 8, paragraph (1) of the Act (hereinafter referred to simply as an "act subject to surcharge") is established at the time of entry into an agreement for their sale or provision, and circumstances are found to exist that cause a significant difference between the total amount of consideration for goods delivered or services provided during the Subject Period and the total amount of consideration for the sale of goods or provision of services established in agreements entered into during the Subject Period, the method for calculating the Proceeds from sales prescribed in that paragraph is to aggregate the amounts of consideration for the sale of goods or provision of services as prescribed in the agreements entered into during the Subject Period.
2 (略)
(2) (omitted)
イ 総売上額からの控除項目
(a) Items deducted from the total Proceeds from sales
(ア)総売上額を引渡基準により算定する場合、総売上額からの控除項目は、以下のとおりとなる。
(a) If the total Proceeds from sales is calculated using the basis for transactions, then the items deducted from the total Proceeds from sales are as follows:
① 本政令第1条第1号に該当する値引き額
(i) The discount amount which falls under Article 1, item (i) of this Cabinet Order
課徴金対象期間において商品の量目不足、品質不良又は破損、役務の不足又は不良その他の事由により対価の額の全部又は一部が控除された場合における控除額
Deducted amounts in cases where all or part of the amount of compensation is deducted due to a shortage of quantity of goods, poor quality or breakage, shortage of services or faults, or other reasons in the subject period
② 本政令第1条第2号に該当する返品額
(ii) The amount of returned goods when Article 1, item (ii) of this Cabinet Order is applied
課徴金対象期間に返品された場合における返品商品の対価相当額
An amount equivalent to that of the goods which were returned during the subject period
③ 本政令第1条第3号に該当する割戻金の額
(iii) The rebated amount that falls under Article 1, item (iii) of this Cabinet Order
商品の引渡し又は役務の提供の実績に応じて割戻金を支払うべき旨が書面によって明らかな契約があった場合に、当該契約に基づき課徴金対象期間におけるその実績により算定した割戻金の額
If there is a written contract which stipulated the amount to be rebated and was calculated based on the actual results for the subject period, then the amount rebated will be calculated according to the actual results of the delivery of goods or the provision of services based on the contract.
なお、本政令第1条第1号又は第2号は、それぞれ、課徴金対象期間内に商品の量目不足等により対価の額が控除された場合における控除額や同期間内に返品された場合における返品商品の対価相当額を控除することを規定するものであり、課徴金対象期間中に引き渡した又は提供した商品又は役務の値引き又は返品であるか否かは、本政令第1条第1号又は同条第2号の該当性とは関係がない。これに対し、本政令第1条第3号に該当する割戻金の額は、課徴金対象期間中に引き渡した商品又は提供した役務に対応する割戻金の額に限定される。
Note that Article 1, items (i) and (ii) of this Cabinet Order respectively stipulate that the amount is to be deducted if amounts were deducted to prices due to a shortage of goods etc., during the subject period, or the return of the goods during the subject period; the applicability of Article 1, items (i) and (ii) of this Cabinet Order have nothing to do with whether or not the goods or services delivered or provided during the subject period should be regarded as discounted or returned. However, the amount rebated under Article 1, item (iii) of this Cabinet Order is limited to the amount rebated corresponding to the goods delivered or services provided during the subject period.
(イ)契約基準により「売上額」を算定する場合には、割戻金の額が総売上額からの控除項目となる(本政令第2条第2項)。
(b) When calculating the "Proceeds from sales" according to the basis for contracts, the rebated amount will be an item deducted from the total Proceeds from sales (Article 2, paragraph (2) of this Cabinet Order).
なお、引渡基準により算定する場合には総売上額からの控除項目となる不足等による値引きと返品は、契約基準により算定する場合には契約の修正という形で行われ、修正された契約額が総売上額となる。
When the calculations are based on the basis for transactions, discounts or returns due to shortage etc., which are items deducted from the total Proceeds from sales, are to be performed by modifying the contract when it is calculated based on the basis for contracts, and the modified contracted amount should be the total Proceeds from sales.
〔本政令〕
[This Cabinet Order]
(法第八条第一項に規定する政令で定める売上額の算定の方法)
(Method for Calculating the Proceeds from Sales Prescribed by the Cabinet Order in Article 8, Paragraph (1) of the Act)
第一条 不当景品類及び不当表示防止法(以下「法」という。)第八条第一項に規定する政令で定める売上額の算定の方法は、次条に定めるものを除き、法第八条第二項に規定する課徴金対象期間(以下単に「課徴金対象期間」という。)において引き渡した商品又は提供した役務の対価の額を合計する方法とする。この場合において、次の各号に掲げる場合に該当するときは、当該各号に定める額を控除するものとする。
Article 1 The method prescribed by Cabinet Order for calculating the Proceeds from sales as provided in Article 8, paragraph (1) of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), is to aggregate the amounts of consideration for the goods delivered or services provided during the Subject Period prescribed in Article 8, paragraph (2) of the Act (hereinafter referred to simply as the "Subject Period"), excluding those prescribed in the following Article. In this, if any of the following items apply, the amount prescribed in that item is to be deducted:
一 課徴金対象期間において商品の量目不足、品質不良又は破損、役務の不足又は不良その他の事由により対価の額の全部又は一部を控除した場合控除した額
(i) if a full or partial deduction has been made from an amount of consideration due to shortage, inferior quality, or damage of goods; insufficiency or inferiority of services; or other reasons during the Subject Period: the amount deducted;
二 課徴金対象期間において商品が返品された場合返品された商品の対価の額
(ii) if goods have been returned during the Subject Period: the amount of the consideration for the returned goods; or
三 商品の引渡し又は役務の提供を行う者が引渡し又は提供の実績に応じて割戻金の支払を行うべき旨が書面によって明らかな契約(一定の期間内の実績が一定の額又は数量に達しない場合に割戻しを行わない旨を定めるものを除く。)があった場合課徴金対象期間におけるその実績について当該契約で定めるところにより算定した割戻金の額(一定の期間内の実績に応じて異なる割合又は額によって算定すべき場合にあっては、それらのうち最も低い割合又は額により算定した額)
(iii) if there was a written agreement clearly indicating that the person delivering the goods or providing the services was to pay a rebate based on its performance in delivering or providing them (except if that agreement prescribes that a rebate will not be paid if its performance during a specific period does not reach a specific amount or quantity): the amount of the rebate calculated pursuant to the provisions of that agreement for its performance during the Subject Period (if the amount of the rebate is to be calculated using different percentages or amounts based on its performance during a specific period, the amount calculated using the lowest percentage or amount among these).
第二条 (略)
Article 2 (1) (omitted)
2 前条(第三号に係る部分に限る。)の規定は、前項に規定する方法により売上額を算定する場合に準用する。
(2) The provisions of the preceding Article (but only the part involving item (iii)) apply mutatis mutandis if Proceeds from sales are calculated by the method prescribed in the preceding paragraph.
第5 「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否か
Section 5 Whether or not it is considered that Entrepreneurs "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness"
事業者が課徴金対象行為をした場合であっても、当該事業者が、「課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて」、自らが行った表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき」は、消費者庁長官は、課徴金の納付を命ずることができない(本法第8条第1項ただし書)。
When an Entrepreneur commits Acts Subject to Surcharge, if they were "unaware" and "they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness", that the representation they made falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act "throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed", then the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency cannot order them to pay surcharges (proviso to Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act).
なお、「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否かは、事業者が課徴金対象行為をした場合に判断する必要があるものである。したがって、例えば、事業者が、公正競争規約に沿った表示のように優良・有利誤認表示に該当しない表示をした場合等、課徴金対象行為が成立しないときは、当該事業者について、「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否かを判断するまでもなく、課徴金の納付を命ずることはない。
Note that whether or not it is recognized that they were "unaware" or "they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" should be judged after the Entrepreneur committed Acts Subject to Surcharge. Therefore, for example, in the case where an Entrepreneur's representation is in line with fair competition code and does not fall under the representations which bring a significantly superior and a significantly more advantageous image to their goods or services and the like, so the Acts Subject to Surcharge have failed to result, they would not be judged whether or not they "fail to exercise due caution" and would not be ordered to pay surcharges.
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 事業者が、第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)をしたときは、内閣総理大臣は、当該事業者に対し、当該課徴金対象行為に係る課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額に百分の三を乗じて得た額に相当する額の課徴金を国庫に納付することを命じなければならない。ただし、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が次の各号のいずれかに該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき、又はその額が百五十万円未満であるときは、その納付を命ずることができない。
Article 8 (1) If an Entrepreneur has acted in violation of the provisions of Article 5 (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of the same Article; hereinafter referred to as the "Acts Subject to Surcharge"), the Prime Minister must order the Entrepreneur to pay to the National Treasury a surcharge equivalent to three percent of Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed; provided, however, that the Prime Minister may not order the payment if it is determined that the Entrepreneur was unaware that their Representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge fell under any of the following items throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, and that they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness, or if the amount of the surcharge is one million five hundred thousand yen or less:
一 商品又は役務の品質、規格その他の内容について、実際のものよりも著しく優良であること又は事実に相違して当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも著しく優良であることを示す表示
(i) Any Representation where the quality, standard or any other particular relating to the content of goods or services is portrayed as being significantly superior to that of the actual goods or services, or are portrayed as being, contrary to fact, significantly superior to those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as those supplied by the relevant Entrepreneur; or
二 商品又は役務の価格その他の取引条件について、実際のものよりも取引の相手方に著しく有利であること又は事実に相違して当該事業者と同種若しくは類似の商品若しくは役務を供給している他の事業者に係るものよりも取引の相手方に著しく有利であることを示す表示
(ii) Any Representation indicating that the price and other trade terms for goods or services are significantly more favorable to the other party in a transaction than they actually are, or that, contrary to fact, they are significantly more advantageous to the other party in a transaction than those of other Entrepreneurs who supply the same kind of or similar goods or services as the relevant Entrepreneur.
2・3 (略)
(2) and (3) (omitted)
1 「相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」
(1) When it is considered that Entrepreneurs "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness"
課徴金対象行為をした事業者が、当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて自らが行った表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを「知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否かは、当該事業者が課徴金対象行為に係る表示をする際に、当該表示の根拠となる情報を確認するなど、正常な商慣習に照らし必要とされる注意をしていたか否かにより、個別事案ごとに判断されることとなる(なお、ここでいう正常な商慣習とは、一般消費者の利益の保護の見地から是認されるものをいう。したがって、仮に、例えば自己の供給する商品の内容について一切確認することなく表示をするといった一定の商慣習が現に存在し、それには反していなかったとしても、そのことによって直ちに「知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」わけではないことに留意する必要がある。)。
Whether or not an Entrepreneur who commits Acts Subject to Surcharge is recognized as not doing "fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness about their lack of awareness" regarding their representation that falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act throughout the period that they have committed their Representation pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge will be judged for each individual case, i.e. regarding if they have taken necessary precautions in light of normal business practices or not, such as reviewing the information that supports the statements. (Note that normal business practices here refers to actions that are endorsed under the viewpoint of protecting the interests of general consumers. Therefore, if there is a certain business practice that, for example, says that representations can be made without confirming the content of the goods supplied by Entrepreneurs, then even if a representation does not go against that business practice, it should take into consideration that will not automatically mean that Entrepreneur "did not fair to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness").
当該判断に当たっては、当該事業者の業態や規模、課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の内容、課徴金対象行為に係る表示内容及び課徴金対象行為の態様等を勘案することとなるが、当該事業者が、必要かつ適切な範囲で、「事業者が講ずべき景品類の提供及び表示の管理上の措置についての指針」(平成26年内閣府告示第276号)に沿うような具体的な措置を講じていた場合には、「相当の注意を怠つた者でない」と認められると考えられる(「事業者が講ずべき景品類の提供及び表示の管理上の措置についての指針」:http://www.caa.go.jp/representation/pdf/141114premiums_5.pdf)。
Upon making such a judgment, the business type and scale of the Entrepreneur, the content of the goods or services concerning the Acts Subject to Surcharge, the content of the representations made concerning the Acts Subject to Surcharge and the form of the Acts Subject to Surcharge, etc. will be taken into consideration; if the Entrepreneur takes specific guidelines in accordance with the "Guidelines for administrative measures that Entrepreneurs should take for provision of premiums or representation of premiums" (Cabinet Office Notice No. 276, of 2014) to the extent that is necessary and appropriate, then Entrepreneur will be recognized as "not fail to exercise due caution" ("Guidelines for administrative measures that Entrepreneurs should take for the provision of premiums or representation ": http://www.caa.go.jp/representation/pdf/141114premiums_5.pdf)
2 「課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて」
(2) Events "throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed"
(1) 消費者庁長官が課徴金の納付を命ずることができないのは、課徴金対象行為をした事業者が、課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて、自らが行った表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき」である。
1. The Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency cannot order an Entrepreneur to pay surcharges if Entrepreneur that committed the Acts Subject to Surcharge "were unaware that their Representations" or "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" they made fell under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed.
このため、課徴金対象行為を始めた日には「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」場合であったとしても、課徴金対象行為をした期間中のいずれかの時点で「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められ」ないときは、課徴金の納付を命ずることとなる。
Therefore, even if it is assumed that Entrepreneur "was unaware" these facts and "they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" on the day when they started to commit the Acts Subject to Surcharge, they will still be required to pay surcharges if it is not "determined that Entrepreneur was unaware" these facts and then failed to "exercise due caution even about their lack of awareness" on any day during the subject period.
例えば、事業者が、課徴金対象行為を始めた日には「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」ものであったものの、当該課徴金対象行為をしている期間中に、同事業者の従業員の報告や第三者からの指摘を受けるなどしたにもかかわらず、何ら必要かつ適切な調査・確認等を行わなかったときには、「課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて」「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められ」ず、課徴金の納付を命ずることとなる。
For example, suppose that on the day when an Entrepreneur starts committing Acts Subject to Surcharge, they are "unaware" the facts and they do not "fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness", however, it is later pointed out by their employees or a third party that they are committing Acts Subject to Surcharge; then if they fail to conduct an appropriate or necessary investigation or confirmations, they will not be judged that they were "unaware" of the facts or that they "did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" "throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed" ; thus, they would be required to pay surcharges.
なお、事業者が課徴金対象行為をやめた後における当該事業者の認識の有無等は、直接の判断対象ではない。
Note that the presence or absence of recognition from Entrepreneur after they have stopped committing Acts Subject to Surcharge will not be subject to a direct judgment.
(2) 課徴金対象行為をした事業者が、当該課徴金対象行為を始めた日から当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを知るまでの期間を通じて当該事実を知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠った者でない場合であって、当該事実を知った後に速やかに課徴金対象行為をやめたときは、当該事業者が当該「課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて」当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠った者でないと「認められる」と考えられる。
2. If an Entrepreneur who commits Acts Subject to Surcharge is recognized as having exercised due caution when they were not aware of their actions from the day they started committing the Acts Subject to Surcharge until the day they realized that their actions regarding their representation fall under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act, and then they stop the Acts Subject to Surcharge immediately after they realize that fact, then it will be "recognized" that said Entrepreneur was unaware and they exercised due caution when they were not aware of their actions that their acts regarding representations subject to surcharge falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act "throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed".
(3) 他方、当該事業者が、当該表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを知った後に速やかに課徴金対象行為をやめなかったときには、課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて相当の注意を怠った者でないと認められない。かかる場合の課徴金額算定の基礎は、「課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の(略)売上額」となる(本法第8条第1項本文。自らが行った表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを知った日以降の当該商品又は役務の売上額のみが課徴金額算定の基礎となるわけではない。)。
3. On the other hand, if the Entrepreneur does not immediately stop committing Acts Subject to Surcharge after realizing that their representation falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of the Act, then Entrepreneur will not be regarded as having exercised due caution throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed. In this case, the basis for calculating the surcharges will be "the Proceeds from sales ... for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed" (main clause of Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act. It is not guaranteed that only the amount of the sales of goods or services starting the day after they realized that their representation falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act will be the basis for calculating the amount of the surcharges).
3 想定例
(3) Hypothetical examples
課徴金対象行為をした事業者が、課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて自らが行った表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」か否かは、個別事案ごとに異なるものである。
Whether or not an Entrepreneur who commits Acts Subject to Surcharge is "unaware" of the facts and does not "fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" regarding their representation that falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, will differ in each individual case.
このため、全ての場合を想定して論じることはできないが、以下、課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が本法第8条第1項第1号又は第2号に該当することを「知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められる」と考えられる想定例を記載することとする。
Thus, it is not possible to discuss assumptions for all cases; however, we will describe some hypothetical examples where it would be "recognized" that said Entrepreneur "was unaware" and "they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness" that their act regarding representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge falls under Article 8, paragraph (1), items (i) or (ii) of this Act throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed.
① 製造業者Aが、自ら製造するシャツを、小売業者を通じて一般消費者に販売するに当たり、当該シャツについて、「通気性が従来製品の10倍」等との記載があるウェブサイトを公開することにより、あたかも、当該シャツの通気性が自社の従来製品の10倍であるかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、そのような通気性を有さなかった事案
(i) Assume Manufacturer A sells their own shirts to general consumers through retailers, and they place information on a website that states "The breathability in our shirts is 10 times better than our conventional shirts", etc. which makes it seem as if the breathability of their shirts is 10 times better than that of their conventional goods; however, their good does not actually have such breathability.
当該事案において、製造業者Aが、
In this case, if Manufacturer A's actions were as follows, it would be recognized that they were unaware and they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness when they were not aware of their actions:
・上記表示をする際に、実績がある等信頼できる検査機関に通気性試験を依頼し、通気性が自社の従来製品の10倍であるという試験結果報告を受けて当該報告内容を確認していたところ、
・Before making the above representation, Manufacturer A conducted breathability testing with a reliable inspection organization which had a good performance record etc. , and received a report indicating test results which stated that the breathability of their good was 10 times better than that of their conventional goods.
・当該検査機関による再試験の結果、実際には、上記表示をする際に依頼した試験結果に誤りがあったことが明らかとなり、速やかに当該表示に係る課徴金対象行為をやめた場合
・The inspection organization then re-tested, and the results showed that it is clear that there was an error in the results of the first test which was conducted as according to the statement above, and after that Manufacturer A promptly stopped the Acts Subject to Surcharge regarding the relevant representation.
② 小売業者Bが、卸売業者から仕入れた鶏肉を用いて自ら製造したおにぎりを一般消費者に供給するに当たり、当該おにぎりについて、当該おにぎりの包装袋に貼付したシールにおいて、「国産鶏肉使用」等と記載することにより、あたかも、当該商品の原材料に我が国で肥育された鶏の肉を用いているかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、当該商品の原材料に外国で肥育された鶏の肉を用いていた事案
(ii) Assume Retailer B supplies rice balls manufactured by themselves to general consumers using chicken purchased from wholesalers, and stickers attached to the packaging of the rice balls state "Domestic chicken is used", etc. which makes it seem as if the meat of domestically grown chicken is used as an ingredient in the good; however, in fact, chicken meat grown overseas is used as an ingredient in the good.
当該事案において、小売業者Bが、
In this case, if Retailer B's actions were as follows, it would be recognized that they were unaware and they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness :
・上記表示をする際に、卸売業者から交付された生産者作成に係る証明書に「国産鶏」と記載されていることを確認していたところ、
・Upon conducting the above labeling, they confirmed the description which stated their use of "domestic chicken" in a certificate that a producer created and issued from their wholesaler,
・当該卸売業者から鶏肉の仕入れをしていた別の小売業者の指摘を契機として、実際には、当該証明書の記載は当該生産者による虚偽の記載であったことが明らかになり、速やかに当該表示に係る課徴金対象行為をやめた場合
・But when they were notified clearly that the statement on the certificate written by the producer was false by a retailer who had purchased chicken from that wholesaler, they promptly stopped the Acts Subject to Surcharge regarding the relevant representation.
③ 小売業者Cが、卸売業者から仕入れた健康食品を、自ら全国において運営するドラッグストアにおいて一般消費者に販売するに当たり、当該健康食品について、全店舗の店頭ポップにおいて、「アセロラ由来のビタミンC含有の健康食品です。」等と記載することにより、あたかも、当該健康食品に含有されているビタミンCがアセロラ果実から得られたものであるかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、当該健康食品に含有されているビタミンCは化学合成により製造されたものであった事案
(iii) Assume Retailer C sells health food goods purchased from a wholesaler to general consumers at drug stores that they operate nationwide, and regarding the health food, they put posters at the front of their stores which state "this good contains acerola-derived vitamin C"; etc. the posters make it seem as if the vitamin C contained in the health food good is obtained from acerola fruit, however, the vitamin C contained in the health food good is actually manufactured through chemical synthesis.
当該事案において、小売業者Cが、
In this case, if Retailer C's actions were as follows, it would be recognized that they were unaware and did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness:
・上記表示をする際に、卸売業者から仕入れた当該健康食品のパッケージに「アセロラ由来のビタミンC含有」との記載があることを確認していたところ、
・Upon making the above representation, the retailer confirmed that the packaging of the health food good purchased from a wholesaler had a description of "containing acerola-derived vitamin C".
・消費者庁から当該健康食品の表示に関する質問を受け、この後に速やかに当該健康食品の製造業者に問い質したところ、実際には、当該健康食品に含有されているビタミンCはアセロラ果実から得られたものではなく化学合成により製造されたものであったことが明らかとなり、速やかに当該表示に係る課徴金対象行為をやめた場合
・When they were questioned about the labeling of the health food good by the Consumer Affairs Agency, they promptly asked the manufacturer of the health food good, and they learned that, in fact, the vitamin C contained in the health food good was manufactured through chemical synthesis and not obtained from acerola fruits; thus, they promptly stopped the Acts Subject to Surcharge regarding the relevant representation.
④小売業者Dが、製造業者から仕入れた布団を通信販売の方法により一般消費者に販売するに当たり、当該布団について、テレビショッピング番組において、「カシミヤ80%」との文字を使用した映像及び「ぜいたくにカシミヤを80%使いました」等の音声をテレビ放送局に放送させることにより、あたかも、当該布団の詰め物の原材料としてカシミヤが80%用いられているかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、当該布団の詰め物の原材料にカシミヤは用いられていなかった事案
(iv) Assume Retailer D sells futons (Japanese bedding) purchased from a manufacturer to general consumers by a mail order method, and they use a TV broadcaster to run a TV commercial for that futon; during a television shopping program, their commercial is shown with digital lettering that states "80 percent Cashmere", along with audio that states "an abundant, 80 percent of cashmere is used in the stuffing", which makes it seem as if the raw material of the stuffing is 80 percent cashmere; however, in fact, cashmere is not used as a raw material for the stuffing of the futon.
当該事案において、小売業者Dが、
In this case, if Retailer D's actions were as follows, it would be recognized that they were unaware and they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness:
・上記表示をする際に、当該布団を製造した事業者からカシミヤを80%含んでいる旨の混合率に関する検査結果報告を提出させ、当該報告を確認していたところ、
・When making the above representation, the retailer required the futon manufacturer to submit inspection results regarding the ratio of the mixed content of the stuffing, and the results indicated that it contained 80 percent cashmere, so they confirmed the report.
・当該布団を含め自社で取り扱っている全商品について実施した抜き打ち検査により、実際には、当該布団にはカシミヤが用いられていないことが明らかとなり、速やかに当該表示に係る課徴金対象行為をやめた場合
・Later, they conducted unannounced in-house inspections for all of their goods, including the futon, and it became clear that cashmere was not actually used for the futon, after which they promptly stopped the Acts Subject to Surcharge regarding the relevant representation.
⑤旅行業者Eが、自ら企画した募集型企画旅行(旅行業者があらかじめ旅行計画を作成し、旅行者を募集するもの)を、自ら全国において運営する複数の店舗において一般消費者に提供するに当たり、当該旅行について、全店舗に設置したパンフレットにおいて、「豪華松阪牛のすき焼きを食す旅」等と記載することにより、あたかも、当該旅行の行程中に提供される料理(すき焼き)が松阪牛を使用したものであるかのように示す表示をしていたものの、実際には、松阪牛ではない外国産の牛肉を使用したすき焼きが提供されていた事案
(v) Assume Travel Agency E provides a package tour that they planned (travel agencies prepare travel plans in advance and then find participants to join) to general consumers at several stores which they operate nationwide, and regarding said package tour, brochures installed at all of their stores state "Come and eat Luxurious Matsusaka beef sukiyaki on this trip" etc., which makes it seem as if the food (Sukiyaki) provided during the trip is cooked using Matsusaka beef; however, in fact, sukiyaki using beef imported from foreign countries, rather than Matsusaka beef, was provided.
当該事案において、旅行業者Eが、
In this case, if Travel Agency E's actions were as follows, it would be recognized that they were unaware and they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness:
・上記表示をする際に、当該旅行の行程における宿泊先であるホテルで提供されるすき焼きの食材について、ホテル運営事業者との間で当該旅行の宿泊客に対して松阪牛を使用したすき焼きを提供することを合意し、当該ホテル運営事業者を通じて松阪牛を納入する事業者から松阪牛の納入に関する証明書の提出を受けて確認していたところ、
・ When Travel Agency E made the above representation, they discussed the ingredients of the sukiyaki provided at the hotel which use in the tour with a hotel management company, and the company agreed that they would serve Matsusaka beef to the tourists who participated in said package tour, and then they received a certificate for the delivery of Matsusaka beef from a Matsusaka beef supplier through the hotel management company, and they confirmed the certificate.
・ 当該ホテル運営事業者の従業員からの申告を契機として、実際には、当該ホテル運営事業者の独断ですき焼きに松阪牛以外の外国産の牛肉を使用したすき焼きが提供されていたことが明らかとなり、速やかに当該表示に係る課徴金対象行為をやめた場合
・Upon receiving a report from an employee of the hotel management company, it became clear that sukiyaki using foreign beef rather than Matsusaka beef was served at the hotel manager's own discretion, and after that the agency promptly stopped the Acts Subject to Surcharge regarding the relevant representation.
第6 規模基準
Section 6 Criteria for the range of surcharge
本法第8条第1項の規定により算定した課徴金額が150万円未満(課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の売上額が5000万円未満)であるときは、課徴金の納付を命ずることができない(本法第8条第1項ただし書)。
When the amount of the surcharges calculated under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act is less than one million five hundred thousand yen (meaning the Proceeds from sales of goods or services pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge was less than fifty million yen), then the payment of surcharges cannot be ordered (proviso of Article 8, paragraph (1), of this Act).
なお、「その額」すなわち「課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額」に3%を乗じて得た額(本法第8条第1項本文により算定した課徴金額。算定方法について前記第4参照。)が150万円以上である場合、課徴金対象行為に該当する事実の報告や返金措置の実施による課徴金額の減額の結果、減額後の金額が150万円未満になったとしても、当該減額後の金額について、課徴金の納付を命ずることとなる。
Note that if "the amount of the surcharge" obtained by taking 3 percent of the "Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed" (the amount of surcharge calculated under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act. See above Section 4 for the calculation method) is one million five hundred thousand yen or more, then even if the amount becomes less than one million five hundred thousand yen due to a reduction based on reports of the facts about Acts Subject to Surcharge or handling of Refund Policy, payment of the surcharges for the amount after the reduction will still be ordered.
<想定例>
事業者が行った課徴金対象行為について、本法第8条第1項の規定により算定した課徴金額が200万円である場合において、当該事業者が本法第9条の要件を満たす課徴金対象行為に該当する事実の報告を行い課徴金額から50%相当額が減額され、更に所定の要件を満たす返金措置の実施により課徴金額から50万円が減額されることとなったとき、当該事業者に対して、50万円(200万円-200万円×50%-50万円)の課徴金の納付を命ずることとなる。
Regarding the Acts Subject to Surcharge that an Entrepreneur committed in a case in which the surcharge amount calculated under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act was two million yen, Entrepreneur reported facts which satisfied the requirements of Article 9 of this Act, and then an amount equivalent to 50 percent of the surcharges was reduced from the original amount; furthermore, five hundred thousand yen was reduced from the amount of surcharges due to the implementing Refund Policy that met predetermined requirements, then, the Entrepreneur would be required to pay a surcharge of five hundred thousand yen, (two million yen - two million yen * 50 percent - five hundred thousand yen).
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 事業者が、第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)をしたときは、内閣総理大臣は、当該事業者に対し、当該課徴金対象行為に係る課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額に百分の三を乗じて得た額に相当する額の課徴金を国庫に納付することを命じなければならない。ただし、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が次の各号のいずれかに該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき、又はその額が百五十万円未満であるときは、その納付を命ずることができない。
Article 8 (1) If an Entrepreneur has acted in violation of the provisions of Article 5 (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of the same Article; hereinafter referred to as the "Acts Subject to Surcharge"), the Prime Minister must order the Entrepreneur to pay to the National Treasury a surcharge equivalent to three percent of Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed; provided, however, the Prime Minister may not order the payment if it is determined that the Entrepreneur was unaware that their Representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge fell under any of the following items throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, and that they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness, or if the amount of the surcharge is one million five hundred thousand yen or less:
一・二(略)
(i) and (ii) (omitted)
2・3(略)
(2) and (3) (omitted)
第7 課徴金納付命令に関する不実証広告規制
Section 7 Restrictions on advertisements with content that is not proven concerning the Payment Order for a Surcharge
消費者庁長官は、課徴金納付命令に関し、例えばダイエット効果を標ぼうする商品や器具等の効果や性能に関する表示が優良誤認表示に該当するか否かを判断するため必要があるときは、当該表示を行った事業者に対し、期間を定めて、当該表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出を求めることができ、この場合において、当該事業者が当該資料を提出しないときは、消費者庁長官が当該表示について実際のものとは異なるものであること等の具体的な立証を行うまでもなく、当該表示を優良誤認表示と推定する(本法第8条第3項)。
Upon issuing a Payment Order for a Surcharge, for example if it is necessary for the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency to determine whether or not the representation regarding the effect or performance of a good or equipment for which a weight-loss effect is claimed falls under representations which bring significantly superior images to their goods or services, the Commissioner of the Agency may designate a period of time and require the relevant Entrepreneur to submit data as reasonable ground for the Representation the Entrepreneur has made; in this case, if Entrepreneur does not submit said data, the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency can presume that it is a representation which brings significantly superior images to their goods or services (Article 8, paragraph (3) of the Act) without specific proving the evidence that said representation is against the fact.
事業者は、自らが行った表示について本法第8条第3項の規定により優良誤認表示であると「推定」された場合には、資料提出期間経過後であっても、当該表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す新しい資料を提出し、当該表示が優良誤認表示には該当しないことを主張することができる。
If it is "presumed" that Entrepreneur made representation which brings significantly superior images to their goods or services based on the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (3) of this Act regarding the representation they made, then they are able to submit new data which support said representation, and they can claim that it does not fall under representations which bring significantly superior images to their goods or services even after the expiration of submission period.
なお、合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出要求は、上記のとおり課徴金納付命令に関して行われる場合のほか、本法第7条第2項により、同条第1項による命令(措置命令)に関して行われる場合がある。かかる場合において、当該資料の提出要求を受けた事業者が当該資料を提出しないときは、消費者庁長官が当該表示について実際のものとは異なるものであること等の具体的な立証を行うまでもなく、当該表示は優良誤認表示とみなされる(本法第7条第2項)。
Note that a request to submit data as reasonable ground could be conducted for the Payment Order for a Surcharge as stated above; furthermore, it also could be conducted based on Article 7, paragraph (2) of this Act, as an order stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article (orders for action). In this case, if Entrepreneur who was requested to submit said data does not submit said data, the Commissioner of the Consumer Affairs Agency concerned deems that it is a representation that brings significantly superior images to their goods or services (Article 7, paragraph (2) of this Act) without specific proving the evidence that said representation is against the fact.
本法第7条第2項と本法第8条第3項は、表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出の求めを受けた事業者が当該資料を提出しないときに、優良誤認表示であると「みなす」か「推定する」かという効果の点において異なるが、その他は同様である。
Article 7, paragraph (2) of this Act and Article 8, paragraph (3) of this Act are different in the effects, i.e. in that their representation will be "deemed" or "presumed" as representation which brings significantly superior images to their goods or services if Entrepreneurs do not submit the required data; however, the other parts are the same.
このため、本法第8条第3項の適用についての考え方、「合理的な根拠」の判断基準及び表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出手続は、「不当景品類及び不当表示防止法第7条第2項の運用指針」(平成15年10月28日公正取引委員会)と同様である。
Thus, the concept of the application of Article 8, paragraph (3) of this Act, the judgment criteria for the "reasonable grounds" and the procedures for the submission of data as reasonable grounds for the Representation are the same as described in the "Guidelines for the Application of Article 7, Paragraph (2) of the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations" (October 28, 2003 Fair Trade Commission).
〔本法〕
[This Act]
(課徴金納付命令)
(Payment Order for Surcharge)
第八条 事業者が、第五条の規定に違反する行為(同条第三号に該当する表示に係るものを除く。以下「課徴金対象行為」という。)をしたときは、内閣総理大臣は、当該事業者に対し、当該課徴金対象行為に係る課徴金対象期間に取引をした当該課徴金対象行為に係る商品又は役務の政令で定める方法により算定した売上額に百分の三を乗じて得た額に相当する額の課徴金を国庫に納付することを命じなければならない。ただし、当該事業者が当該課徴金対象行為をした期間を通じて当該課徴金対象行為に係る表示が次の各号のいずれかに該当することを知らず、かつ、知らないことにつき相当の注意を怠つた者でないと認められるとき、又はその額が百五十万円未満であるときは、その納付を命ずることができない。
Article 8 (1) If an Entrepreneur has acted in violation of the provisions of Article 5 (excluding acts pertaining to Representations that fall under item (iii) of the same Article; hereinafter referred to as the "Acts Subject to Surcharge"), the Prime Minister must order the Entrepreneur to pay to the National Treasury a surcharge equivalent to three percent of Proceeds from sales, which is calculated by a method prescribed by Cabinet Order pertaining to the Acts Subject to Surcharge, for goods or services transacted during the subject period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge are committed; provided, however, the Prime Minister may not order the payment if it is determined that the Entrepreneur was unaware that their Representations pertaining to Acts Subject to Surcharge fell under any of the following items throughout the time period when the Acts Subject to Surcharge were committed, and that they did not fail to exercise due caution about their lack of awareness, or if the amount of the surcharge is one million five hundred thousand yen or less:
一・二(略)
(i) and (ii) (omitted)
2 (略)
(2) (omitted)
3 内閣総理大臣は、第一項の規定による命令(以下「課徴金納付命令」という。)に関し、事業者がした表示が第五条第一号に該当するか否かを判断するため必要があると認めるときは、当該表示をした事業者に対し、期間を定めて、当該表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出を求めることができる。この場合において、当該事業者が当該資料を提出しないときは、同項の規定の適用については、当該表示は同号に該当する表示と推定する。
(3) When the Prime Minister finds it necessary in order to evaluate whether any Representation falls under Article 5, item (i) with regard to the order prescribed under paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as the "Payment Order for a Surcharge."), the Prime Minister may designate a period of time and require the relevant Entrepreneur to submit data as reasonable grounds for the Representation the Entrepreneur has made. In such cases, if the Entrepreneur fails to submit the data, the Representation is presumed to fall under the same item for the purpose of applying the provisions of the same paragraph.
第七条 内閣総理大臣は、第四条の規定による制限若しくは禁止又は第五条の規定に違反する行為があるときは、当該事業者に対し、その行為の差止め若しくはその行為が再び行われることを防止するために必要な事項又はこれらの実施に関連する公示その他必要な事項を命ずることができる。その命令は、当該違反行為が既になくなつている場合においても、次に掲げる者に対し、することができる。
Article 7 (1) The Prime Minister may, in the event that an Entrepreneur acts in violation of the limitations or prohibitions under the provisions of Article 4 or the provisions of Article 5, order the relevant Entrepreneur to cease committing the violation, or to take the measures necessary to prevent the reoccurrence of the violation, or to take any other necessary measures including public notification of the particulars relating to the implementation of the measures. Such an order may be issued to the following persons even when the violation has already ceased to exist:
一 当該違反行為をした事業者
(i) The Entrepreneur who committed the violation;
二 当該違反行為をした事業者が法人である場合において、当該法人が合併により消滅したときにおける合併後存続し、又は合併により設立された法人
(ii) Where the Entrepreneur who committed the violation is a corporation and has ceased to exist as a result of a merger: the corporation which continues to exist after the merger takes place or the corporation which becomes incorporated upon the merger taking place;
三 当該違反行為をした事業者が法人である場合において、当該法人から分割により当該違反行為に係る事業の全部又は一部を承継した法人
(iii) Where the Entrepreneur who committed the violation is a corporation: another corporation which has taken over the whole of or part of the business pertaining to the violation from the corporation as a result of a split; and
四 当該違反行為をした事業者から当該違反行為に係る事業の全部又は一部を譲り受けた事業者
(iv) the Entrepreneur who has acquired the whole or part of the business pertaining to the violation from the Entrepreneur who committed the violation.
2 内閣総理大臣は、前項の規定による命令に関し、事業者がした表示が第五条第一号に該当するか否かを判断するため必要があると認めるときは、当該表示をした事業者に対し、期間を定めて、当該表示の裏付けとなる合理的な根拠を示す資料の提出を求めることができる。この場合において、当該事業者が当該資料を提出しないときは、同項の規定の適用については、当該表示は同号に該当する表示とみなす。
(2) With regard to the order prescribed in the preceding paragraph, when the Prime Minister finds it necessary in order to evaluate whether any Representation falls under Article 5, item (i), the Prime Minister may designate a period of time and require the relevant Entrepreneur to submit data as reasonable grounds for the Representation the Entrepreneur has made. In such cases, if the Entrepreneur fails to submit the data, the Representation concerned is deemed to fall under the same item for the purpose of applying the provisions of the same paragraph.