अनुबाद - जापानी-अंग्रेजी - このうち

Of these, as for (1), in spite of the fact that the defendant presented the following evidence:
- his e-mail message to the plaintiff demanding the latter return the list of names,
as well as
- the strict prohibition regarding the removal of the list of names and other such materials from the office premises,
the court simply went and groundlessly accepted the claims of the prosecution, in spite of the plaintiff himself even having presented the above prohibition in his evidence!

As for (3), the court considered the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant until the time of the event (e.g. the plaintiff had sent the defendant invoice(s) requiring payment of the latter's account balance but the defendant had not made this payment, and so on) to be such that the plaintiff had no choice but to approach the client in person, in which light the court judged that the plaintiff's words and actions at that time could not be properly considered illegal.
With respect to other points as well, the court generally seemed content just to accept the claims of the prosecution. However, because it is difficult to see how some of these claims could have been accepted based simply on the evidence presented in court, the court seems to have rendered a verdict which showed undue preference to the prosecution.