The cited record supports the material proposition.
Kobe Steel was fined 100 million yen in March 2019 for violating Japan's Unfair Competition Prevention Act over its product misconduct.
- About
- Kobe Steel, Ltd.
- Claim made by
- Kobe Steel, Ltd., company statement
- Published
- 13 March 2019
- Evidence score
- 74 How it was scored
- Last reviewed
- 25 October 2026
Why this label
The company's release reports that the Tachikawa Summary Court ordered a fine of 100 million yen on a charge under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act over the misconduct concerning its productsS4. The company apologized to customers in the same releaseS4. Some accounts place the ruling at the Tokyo District Court, but the company names the Tachikawa Summary Court. The court record itself was not read, so the details rest on the company's account. The release does not mention an appeal. No later development was found.
Current procedural position
Fine of 100 million yen ordered by the Tachikawa Summary Court on 13 March 2019, per the companyS4. No appeal mentioned. Treated as final as of October 2026.
Record supporting the assessment
for violating the Unfair Competition Prevention Act over the misconduct concerning its products
Conflicting or limiting record
No record located that conflicts with this assessment.
Evidence score: 74 of 100
The score grades how well the record establishes this assessment. It is not a score of Kobe Steel, Ltd.. Score = source authority + directness + corroboration + procedural accuracy + currency + reproducibility.
| Component | Points | Max | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source authorityIs the source competent to establish the proposition? | 20 | 30 | The company release reports the court decision, but the judgment was not read. |
| DirectnessDoes the source state the proposition or only discuss adjacent facts? | 18 | 20 | The release states the court, the law and the fine. |
| CorroborationDo independent records support the same material point? | 7 | 15 | No independent court or prosecutor record was read. |
| Procedural accuracyDoes the record settle the procedural state the claim describes? | 12 | 15 | No appeal is mentioned and none was found. |
| CurrencyHas the record been checked against later developments? | 8 | 10 | A search for 2025 and 2026 developments found nothing new. |
| ReproducibilityCan a reader locate the passage and repeat the assessment? | 9 | 10 | The release is public on kobelco.co.jp. |
| Total | 74 | 100 |
Timeline
- Tachikawa Summary Court orders the fineS4
Related cases
- Public prosecutors v. Kobe Steel, Ltd.Tachikawa Summary Court, Japan. Criminal. Not published.Stage: Fine ordered on 13 March 2019.
- Fine of 100 million yen under the Unfair Competition Prevention ActS4
Responses
- Kobe Steel, Ltd., 13 March 2019: The company apologized for the trouble and concern caused to customers and pointed to reforms of its structure and culture.S4
Revision history
- Assessment first published with label Supported.
Have a record that changes this assessment? See corrections and responses.
Sources
- S4Tier B About the decision on Kobe Steel's violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention ActKobe Steel, Ltd.. Company statement. 13 March 2019.Company report of the Tachikawa Summary Court fine. It does not reproduce the judgment.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
Other claims about Kobe Steel, Ltd.
- Supported79Kobe Steel disclosed in October 2017 that its Aluminum & Copper Business had shipped products that did not meet customer specifications with falsified inspection data.Company statement, 8 October 20173 records citedProduct claims
- Unverifiable31A 2018 press report said Kobe Steel's data fraud had lasted nearly five decades.Press report, July 20181 record citedProduct claims
- Partly supported53Kobe Steel said in 2018 that its safety verification had found no cases requiring immediate suspension of use or recall of customers' products.Company statement, 18 May 20182 records citedSafety
- Supported62Kobe Steel said in July 2019 that the US Justice Department confirmed it required no further documents in its investigation of the misconduct.Company statement, 17 July 20192 records citedCorporate status