From our other sites
The story
It has come to light that Miyo Junka (58), the singer who was the common-law wife of the late Koji Nakamoto, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court dated the 6th in her defamation suit over a Shukan Shincho report claiming she “was scolded by Cha Kato after Nakamoto’s death.” In a similar lawsuit against Shukan Josei over comparable reporting, the Tokyo District Court dismissed her claims, ruling that “her social reputation was not diminished,” and Junka’s side reportedly intends to fight this case just as hard. On 5ch, attention focused on the fact that the trial is proceeding without any testimony from Cha Kato himself — the man at the center of the dispute — sparking a clash between posters asking “why not just ask him directly?” and others making the legal point that civil suits don’t require the plaintiff to prove a negative, i.e. that something didn’t happen.
Koji Nakamoto’s Common-Law Wife Miyo Junka Appeals to Supreme Court in Shukan Shincho Lawsuit… Scolding by Cha Kato: “Not a Single Person Witnessed It”
It has been learned that singer Miyo Junka (58), common-law wife of the late entertainer Koji Nakamoto, has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in her defamation lawsuit against Shukan Shincho.
Junka’s side revealed this to reporters. The appeal is dated the 6th. Junka intends to fight the case all the way…
Source: news.yahoo.co.jp / Original article here
What people said
Junka's lawyer could just go talk to Kato and put together a statement proving it never happened — the fact that they can't get his cooperation kind of says it all.
Either he doesn't remember, or he's said from the start that he doesn't want to get involved. You can tell the relationship isn't great.
Even in a civil case, there's absolutely no requirement to prove a negative (the so-called "devil's proof" — proving something didn't happen).
What do you even know about Kato-chan? lol
The one being unreasonable is the publisher.
Well, the court doesn't rule on whether the article's content is actually true — it only examines whether the outlet reported responsibly. If she already lost that argument against two publishers, there's not much more the plaintiff can argue here.
Huh? That's automatic though. But even when Bunshun loses one of these suits, they just write it off as a business expense lol
No, I mean the people actually involved — if none of them come forward as witnesses, it's fine to just write the story off as made up.
Well, filing an appeal is a right everyone has.
The issue at stake is whether the report that Kato scolded her was fabricated. So Kato simply saying "that never happened" wouldn't be a "devil's proof" at all, would it?
Cha Kato is, after all, a pretty major celebrity. If the plaintiff had a direct line to him, sure, maybe that'd work — but did they really have that kind of day-to-day relationship? If not, demanding that as if it's a given seems like a pretty harsh ask for the plaintiff.
In that sense, she already lost the suit against Shukan Josei lol. Dismissed lol. We still don't know whether the "it's your fault" scolding really happened lol, but it means the court found the reporting had reasonable grounds to be believed true. She beat Shukan Josei and Shincho on other points, but defamation over the scolding itself wasn't recognized lol. All three rulings land on the same conclusion lol
Presiding Judge Yotabun Hirosato (余多分宏聡) noted that the description of Kato's scolding doesn't give the impression that Miyo's conduct caused Nakamoto's sudden death, and ruled that her social reputation was not diminished.
Nakamoto Koji's Wife's Claim Dismissed: Tokyo District Court Finds No Defamation, Says Magazine Article Did Not Diminish Social Reputation
https://www.sankei.com/article/20251212-ZIA7NXDI6ZK6TDT5HFWLBEVL4M/
Isn't it that his word alone wouldn't be enough proof the story was fabricated?
Why would you assume that'd settle it? There's no guarantee Kato would even tell the truth.
But if the scolding really did happen while they were alone, it'd all be over the moment Kato admits he scolded her. I can't tell if his staying silent is one last act of mercy or if he just doesn't want to get involved.
How would a magazine reporter even know what happened when it was just the two of them alone? lol
Given the sequence of events, I thought she was suing the district court itself.
I think that's one of the big problems here. If an article portrays Cha Kato — who has such a gentle, mild-mannered image — as yelling at her like some kind of killer, the public will naturally think "oh, she must really be that kind of woman." I think there's a real problem with the judiciary not taking this seriously as an issue.
Background and Key Points of This Story
Defamation suits in Japan typically hinge not on whether an article’s content is actually true, but on whether the outlet had reasonable grounds for believing it to be true at the time of reporting (“reasonable-grounds” doctrine, or shinjitsu sōtōsei) — meaning that even at the district and high court level, whether the scolding itself actually happened was never definitively ruled on. In December 2025, in a similar suit against Shukan Josei over comparable reporting, the Tokyo District Court dismissed Miyo’s claims, finding her “social reputation was not diminished” — and with a similar structure in play, her side appears to have pushed the Shincho case all the way to the Supreme Court as well. On the thread, opinion split between those who felt the matter could be quickly resolved if Cha Kato simply testified himself, and those pointing out that in a civil suit, the plaintiff isn’t required to prove the negative — that the scolding never happened. That disagreement stems from differing understandings of how the burden of proof actually works in defamation cases.
*This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (Geinou Sports Breaking+) thread “[Entertainment] Koji Nakamoto’s Common-Law Wife Miyo Junka Appeals to Supreme Court in Shukan Shincho Lawsuit… Scolding by Cha Kato: “Not a Single Person Witnessed It”.”
Leave a Reply