Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Literature Survey,” Journal of the Japanese and International Economies vol.4, pp. 49-92.

Ishikawa, Tsuno and Kazuo Ueda (1984). “The Bonus Payment System and Japanese Personal Savings,” in Aoki ed. The Economic Analysis of the Japanese Firm, pp. 133-192.

Mizoguchi, Toshiyuki (1970). Personal Savings and Consumption in Postwar Japan, Economic Research Series No.12, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Kinokuniya.

Sato, Kazuo (1987). “Saving and Investment,” in Yamamura and Yasuba ed. The Political Economy of Japan Volume 1: The Domestic Transformation, pp. 137-185.

Shinohara, Miyohei (1959). “The Structure of Saving and Consumption Function in Postwar Japan,” Journal of Political Economy, vol.67 (6), pp.589-603.

Shinohara, Miyohei (1962). Growth and Cycles in the Japanese Economy, Economic Research Series No.5, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Kinokuniya.

Shinohara, Miyohei (1970). Structural Changes in Japan’s Economic Development, Economic Research Series No.12, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Kinokuniya.

Shinohara, Miyohei (1982). “Japan’s High Savings Ratio: Its Determinants and Behavior Patterns, with Some Comparisons with Asian NICs,” Industrial Growth, Trade, and Dynamic Patterns in the Japanese Economy, University of Tokyo Press.
図１ ボーナスが年収に占める比率と貯蓄率
表 1 基本統計量

全世帯	ボーナス受領世帯	ボーナス非受領世帯
世帯数	平均	標準偏差	世帯数	平均	標準偏差	世帯数	平均	標準偏差
ボーナス受領ダミー(あり=1)	19,591	0.79	0.41	15,382	1.00	0.00	4,209	0.00	0.00
家計の過去1年の貯蓄率(広義)	19,591	16.47	20.56	15,382	17.33	19.26	4,209	13.32	24.49
年間収入の手取りに占める貯蓄割合(狭義)	19,509	11.93	10.04	15,324	12.11	9.86	4,185	11.27	10.66
ボーナスや臨時収入に占める貯蓄割合(狭義)	19,568	16.04	21.78	15,359	20.44	22.68
年間手取り収入(税引後)	19,591	626.3	330.2	15,382	633.2	305.3	4,209	600.7	407.3
世帯員数	19,591	3.69	1.22	15,382	3.75	1.18	4,209	3.48	1.32
共働きダミー(共働き=1)	19,591	0.51	0.50	15,382	0.49	0.50	4,209	0.60	0.49
勤労者ダミー(勤労者=1)	19,591	0.63	0.48	15,382	0.74	0.44	4,209	0.25	0.43
職業ダミー0(農林漁業者=1)	19,591	0.03	0.17	15,382	0.02	0.13	4,209	0.08	0.27
職業ダミー1(自営商工サービス=1)	19,591	0.19	0.39	15,382	0.11	0.31	4,209	0.49	0.50
職業ダミー2(事務系職員=1)	19,591	0.21	0.41	15,382	0.26	0.44	4,209	0.04	0.20
職業ダミー3(労務系職員=1)	19,591	0.23	0.42	15,382	0.26	0.44	4,209	0.13	0.33
職業ダミー4(管理職=1)	19,591	0.19	0.39	15,382	0.22	0.41	4,209	0.08	0.27
職業ダミー5(自由業=1)	19,591	0.03	0.17	15,382	0.02	0.13	4,209	0.07	0.26
職業ダミー6(その他=1)	19,591	0.11	0.31	15,382	0.11	0.31	4,209	0.11	0.32
世帯主年齢ダミー0(20台=1)	19,591	0.04	0.20	15,382	0.04	0.21	4,209	0.02	0.15
世帯主年齢ダミー1(30台=1)	19,591	0.20	0.40	15,382	0.23	0.42	4,209	0.10	0.30
世帯主年齢ダミー2(40台=1)	19,591	0.33	0.47	15,382	0.35	0.48	4,209	0.24	0.43
世帯主年齢ダミー3(50台=1)	19,591	0.28	0.45	15,382	0.28	0.45	4,209	0.29	0.45
世帯主年齢ダミー4(60台=1)	19,591	0.13	0.34	15,382	0.09	0.29	4,209	0.28	0.45
世帯主年齢ダミー5(70台=1)	19,591	0.02	0.16	15,382	0.01	0.11	4,209	0.07	0.26
住居ダミー0(自己持家=1)	19,493	0.53	0.50	15,307	0.52	0.50	4,186	0.55	0.50
住居ダミー1(相続・贈与持家=1)	19,493	0.15	0.36	15,307	0.14	0.34	4,186	0.21	0.41
住居ダミー2(非持家同居=1)	19,493	0.06	0.23	15,307	0.06	0.24	4,186	0.04	0.21
住居ダミー3(非持家民間賃貸=1)	19,493	0.15	0.36	15,307	0.15	0.36	4,186	0.13	0.34
住居ダミー4(非持家公営賃貸=1)	19,493	0.05	0.22	15,307	0.05	0.22	4,186	0.05	0.21
住居ダミー5(非持家官舎社宅=1)	19,493	0.06	0.24	15,307	0.07	0.26	4,186	0.01	0.10
住居ダミー6(非持家間借他=1)	19,493	0.01	0.08	15,307	0.01	0.08	4,186	0.01	0.10
老後の心配ダミー(あり=1、その他=0)	19,486	0.74	0.44	15,294	0.74	0.44	4,192	0.77	0.42
借入金ダミー(あり=1、その他=0)	19,591	0.50	0.50	15,382	0.52	0.50	4,209	0.46	0.50
元本保証重視ダミー(重視=1)	19,591	0.26	0.44	15,382	0.26	0.44	4,209	0.27	0.44
目標貯蓄家計手取り収入比率	18,505	3.81	4.11	14,575	3.55	3.68	3,930	4.77	5.31
目標貯蓄額	18,505	2325.9	2776.5	14,575	2207.1	2500.3	3,930	2766.5	3587.6
貯蓄残高	19,296	1183.4	1442.3	15,175	1128.5	1349.1	4,121	1385.9	1728.1

（注）本文で述べた基準で異常値をサンプルを除外した後の世帯を対象としている。
表 2 最小 2 乗法による貯蓄率関数の推定結果

被説明変数:貯蓄率	全標本(異常値除く)	勤労者標本(異常値除く)
推定係数	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差
ボーナス・ダミー(ボーナスあり=1)	2.069	0.403 ***	3.063	0.655 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー1(30台=1)	-1.065	0.805	-1.113	0.908
世帯主年齢階級ダミー2(40台=1)	-5.912	0.826 ***	-5.745	0.940 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー3(50台=1)	-10.141	0.844 ***	-10.591	0.963 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー4(60台=1)	-8.391	0.918 ***	-8.878	1.113 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー5(70台=1)	-9.333	1.270 ***	-7.097	2.309 ***
老後の暮らし懸念ダミー(心配あり=1)	-1.926	0.346 ***	-1.748	0.413 ***
住居ダミー1(相続・贈与持家=1)	-3.882	0.435 ***	-5.036	0.559 ***
住居ダミー2(非持家・同居=1)	-5.023	0.669 ***	-5.731	0.787 ***
住居ダミー3(非持家・民間賃貸=1)	-6.296	0.490 ***	-7.545	0.589 ***
住居ダミー4(非持家・公営賃貸=1)	-5.309	0.712 ***	-6.164	0.825 ***
住居ダミー5(非持家・官舎社宅=1)	-4.143	0.656 ***	-5.007	0.697 ***
住居ダミー6(非持家・間借他=1)	-5.456	1.697 ***	-6.723	2.237 ***
借入金ダミー(あり=1)	4.285	0.323 ***	4.314	0.389 ***
元本保証重視ダミー(重視=1)	0.447	0.331	0.507	0.388
目標貯蓄額・年収比	0.042	0.040	0.062	0.054
年収(過去1年、対数値)	12.882	0.411 ***	10.995	0.537 ***
貯蓄残高(対数値)	1.021	0.172 ***	1.190	0.210 ***
世帯人数	-3.657	0.661 ***	-3.127	0.820 ***
世帯人数の2乗	0.197	0.081 **	0.125	0.102
共働きダミー(共働き世帯=1)	0.795	0.302 ***	0.502	0.355
勤労者ダミー(勤労者=1)	-0.458	0.339
修正決定係数	0.144	0.140
Root MSE	18.848	17.937
標本数	17306	11100

紙幅の関係上省略してあるが、推定モデルは全て、切片と時点ダミーを含んでいる。

(注記)***、**、*は推定係数がそれぞれ、1%、5%、10%水準で統計学的に有意である事を意味する。
表 3 プロビット推定によるボーナス受領確率を用いた貯蓄率関数 2 段階推定の結果

(1) 第1段階のプロビット・モデル

(2) 第2段階の最小2乗法

被説明変数:ボーナス・ダミー	全標本(異常値除く)	被説明変数:貯蓄率	全標本(異常値除く)	勤労者標本(異常値除く)
dF/dx	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差
世帯主年齢階級ダミー1(30台=1)	0.016	0.017	ボーナス受領確率	2.165	1.470	13.815	5.845 **
世帯主年齢階級ダミー2(40台=1)	-0.047	0.019 ***	世帯主年齢階級ダミー1(30台=1)	-1.069	0.806	-1.082	0.909
世帯主年齢階級ダミー3(50台=1)	-0.095	0.021 ***	世帯主年齢階級ダミー2(40台=1)	-5.915	0.829 ***	-5.330	0.967 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー4(60台=1)	-0.247	0.029 ***	世帯主年齢階級ダミー3(50台=1)	-10.141	0.858 ***	-9.812	1.046 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー5(70台=1)	-0.341	0.040 ***	世帯主年齢階級ダミー4(60台=1)	-8.371	0.977 ***	-7.149	1.519 ***
老後の暮らしダミー(心配あり=1)	-0.019	0.007 ***	老後の暮らしダミー(心配あり=1)	-9.311	1.357 ***	-4.854	2.722 *
住居ダミー1(相続・贈与持家=1)	-0.004	0.008	住居ダミー1(相続・贈与持家=1)	-1.925	0.347 ***	-1.647	0.416 ***
住居ダミー2(非持家同居=1)	-0.001	0.014	住居ダミー2(非持家同居=1)	-3.882	0.436 ***	-4.989	0.559 ***
住居ダミー3(非持家民間質貸=1)	-0.012	0.010	住居ダミー3(非持家民間質貸=1)	-5.018	0.670 ***	-5.760	0.788 ***
住居ダミー4(非持家公営質貸=1)	-0.042	0.016 ***	住居ダミー4(非持家公営質貸=1)	-6.292	0.490 ***	-7.528	0.590 ***
住居ダミー5(非持家官含社宅=1)	0.092	0.011 ***	住居ダミー5(非持家官含社宅=1)	-5.304	0.713 ***	-5.885	0.844 ***
住居ダミー6(非持家間借他=1)	-0.090	0.042 **	住居ダミー6(非持家間借他=1)	-4.146	0.661 ***	-5.448	0.733 ***
借入金ダミー(あり=1)	-0.001	0.006	借入金ダミー(あり=1)	-5.457	1.700 ***	-6.210	2.252 ***
元本保証重視ダミー(重視=1)	0.006	0.007	元本保証重視ダミー(重視=1)	4.283	0.323 ***	4.339	0.389 ***
目標貯蓄額・年収比	-0.003	0.001 ***	目標貯蓄額・年収比	0.047	0.331	0.439	0.390
年収(過去1年、対数値)	0.063	0.008 ***	年収(過去1年、対数値)	0.042	0.041	0.087	0.055
貯蓄残高(対数値)	0.009	0.003 ***	貯蓄残高(対数値)	12.877	0.424 ***	10.577	0.604 ***
世帯人数	0.049	0.013 ***	世帯人数	1.018	0.173 ***	1.134	0.213 ***
世帯人数の2乗	-0.005	0.002 ***	世帯人数の2乗	-3.664	0.664 ***	-3.466	0.844 ***
共働きダミー(共働き=1)	0.005	0.006	共働きダミー(共働き=1)	0.198	0.082 **	0.160	0.105
職業ダミー1(自営商工サービス=1)	-0.086	0.018 ***	勤労者ダミー(勤労者=1)	0.794	0.303 ***	0.520	0.355
職業ダミー2(事務系職員=1)	0.215	0.007 ***	0.545
職業ダミー3(労務系職員=1)	0.172	0.008 ***
職業ダミー4(管理職=1)	0.168	0.008 ***
職業ダミー5(自由業=1)	-0.025	0.021
職業ダミー6(その他=1)	0.118	0.008 ***
標本のポーナス受領比率	0.790
モデル予測のポーナス受領比率	0.854	(at x-bar)
LR chi2(37)	4857.00
擬似決定係数	0.273	修正決定係数	0.141	0.136
対数尤度	-6459.06	Root MSE	18.861	17.95
標本数	17306	標本数	17306	11100

(注記)***、**、*は推定係数がそれぞれ、1%、5%、10%水準で統計学的に有意である事を意味する。

紙幅の関係上省略してあるが、推定モデルは全て、切片と時点ダミーを含んでいる。
表 4 貯蓄率が正の標本に基づく推定結果

被説明変数:貯蓄率	(1)最小2乘法	(2)プロピッチに基づく2段階法
全標本(異常値除く)	勤労者標本(異常値除く)	全標本(異常値除く)	勤労者標本(異常値除く)
推定係数	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差	推定係数	標準誤差
ボーナス受領ダミー(1)/受領確率(2)	-0.180	0.287	0.289	0.480	-1.989	1.033 *	0.499	4.214
世帯主年齢階級ダミー1(30台=1)	-1.198	0.559 **	-1.109	0.640 *	-1.191	0.559 **	-1.105	0.640 *
世帯主年齢階級ダミー2(40台=1)	-3.952	0.575 ***	-3.782	0.664 ***	-4.042	0.577 ***	-3.769	0.681 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー3(50台=1)	-6.750	0.590 ***	-6.926	0.682 ***	-6.933	0.598 ***	-6.903	0.738 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー4(60台=1)	-6.367	0.641 ***	-7.020	0.786 ***	-6.786	0.681 ***	-6.994	1.067 ***
世帯主年齢階級ダミー5(70台=1)	-8.316	0.888 ***	-7.697	1.602 ***	-8.919	0.947 ***	-7.681	1.887 ***
老後の暮らしダミー(心配あり=1)	-1.302	0.239 ***	-1.175	0.288 ***	-1.325	0.240 ***	-1.171	0.290 ***
住居ダミー1(相続・贈与持家=1)	-2.341	0.310 ***	-3.040	0.402 ***	-2.372	0.310 ***	-3.039	0.402 ***
住居ダミー2(非持家同居=1)	-4.192	0.475 ***	-4.462	0.563 ***	-4.198	0.475 ***	-4.464	0.563 ***
住居ダミー3(非持家民間賃貸=1)	-5.374	0.345 ***	-5.869	0.419 ***	-5.399	0.345 ***	-5.871	0.419 ***
住居ダミー4(非持家公営賃貸=1)	-5.049	0.508 ***	-5.511	0.598 ***	-5.106	0.509 ***	-5.515	0.610 ***
住居ダミー5(非持家官舎社宅=1)	-3.716	0.453 ***	-4.172	0.489 ***	-3.622	0.456 ***	-4.183	0.514 ***
住居ダミー6(非持家間借他=1)	-4.668	1.194 ***	-4.312	1.613 ***	-4.779	1.196 ***	-4.289	1.622 ***
借入金ダミー(あり=1)	6.289	0.228 ***	5.956	0.278 ***	6.285	0.228 ***	5.956	0.278 ***
元本保証重視ダミー(重視=1)	0.281	0.230	0.487	0.273 *	0.289	0.230	0.486	0.274 *
目標貯蓄額・年収比	0.239	0.029 ***	0.237	0.039 ***	0.231	0.030 ***	0.238	0.040 ***
年収(過去1年、対数値)	6.835	0.294 ***	5.523	0.387 ***	6.960	0.301 ***	5.517	0.430 ***
貯蓄残高(対数値)	1.580	0.122 ***	1.639	0.150 ***	1.594	0.122 ***	1.639	0.152 ***
世帯人数	-3.731	0.465 ***	-4.049	0.584 ***	-3.653	0.467 ***	-4.054	0.600 ***
世帯人数の2乗	0.263	0.057 ***	0.300	0.073 ***	0.254	0.058 ***	0.300	0.075 ***
共働さダミー(共働さ=1)	0.530	0.211 **	0.285	0.250	0.502	0.211 **	0.287	0.250
勤労者ダミー(勤労者=1)	-0.345	0.237	0.194	0.379
修正決定係数	0.199	0.191	0.197	0.1905
Root MSE	12.228	11.798	12.227	11.798
標本数	13938	9670	14938	9670

(注記)***、**、*は推定係数がそれぞれ、1%、5%、10%水準で統計学的に有意である事を意味する。

2段階推計用のプロビット・モデルについては、表3のそれとまとんど同様なので、割愛した。また、紙幅の関係上省略してあるが、推定モデルは全て、切片と時点ダミーを含んでいる。
## Special Feature: The Changing Investigative Environment and Police Initiatives

## Section 1: Crime Situation and Issues in Investigations

The number of confirmed criminal cases has steadily declined since peaking in 2002, indicating a steady improvement in the crime situation. However, there has been an increasing trend in the number of child-abuse, stalking and spousal violence cases, and total losses from special fraud such as remittance fraud were the highest it had ever been in 2013, demonstrating that the crime situation remains unpredictable. In addition, with a spate of cybercrime incidents and successive cases of cyber-attacks, threats in cyberspace are escalating and posing new issues for public safety.

## 1 The Situation of Criminal Cases

In 2013, the number of confirmed criminal cases was 1,314,140, a decrease of 89,130 cases from the previous year. The number of cleared criminal cases was 394,121, a decrease of 43,489 cases from the previous year and the first time since WWII that it numbered under 400,000.

## 2 Issues Involved in Larceny Investigations

The number of clearance of larceny has continued to fall since 2005. The decrease in the number of clearance of larceny between 2002 and 2013 comprises over 70% of the fall in the number of overall cleared criminal cases during that same period.

## (1) Trends in Clearance of Unsentenced Larceny Crimes

Recently, clearance of unsentenced larceny crimes has markedly dropped. Of the number of cleared larceny cases that exclude settled cases, the number of unsentenced crimes in 2013 fell by half compared to 2004, and the percentage also has decreased by 28.5 points over the past 20 years.

Trends in confirmed and cleared criminal cases (1946–2013)

Trends in the rate of unsentenced larceny crimes (1994–2013)
(2) The Clues of Clearance of Unsentenced Larceny Crimes

The clues of clearance of unsentenced larceny crimes primarily consists of “interrogations of the suspect.” Obtaining a statement about the unsentenced crime in the interrogation of the suspect is essential to investigations of unsentenced larceny crimes.

case and duties outside of direct investigation that should be conducted by police officers in the criminal investigation division are thought to impact the difficulty of sparing sufficient time to interrogate a suspect.

The clues of clearance of larceny (2013)

(3) Reasons for a Decline in Clearance of Unsentenced Larceny Crimes

The fact that it is becoming difficult to obtain a statement from a suspect about an unsentenced crime is a major reason for the decrease in the number of cleared larceny cases.

To give some background, factors such as an increase in investigative matters for a single Special Fraud, such as Remittance Fraud, and Issues in Investigations

(1) Special Fraud

Since May 2003, when “Hey, it’s me” type of remittance call fraud cases began to become prevalent, both the number of confirmed cases and total amount in losses have trended at high levels, but through intensification of police

Number of persons issued warrants by type (2006–2012)

Note: The number of persons issued a seizure/search (permit)/inspection warrant in 2012 includes persons issued a seizure warrant ordering records and written permit.

Source: Judicial statistics
crackdowns and measures, such as preventive action through unification of government and the people, in 2009 the number of confirmed cases and total losses have each declined by a third compared to 2004.

However, since 2011, there has been an increase in swindle by impersonation that primarily targets the elderly and uses the criminal technique of directly receiving cash. The subsequent total losses have grown. In addition, from around 2010 special fraud that does not fall under remittance fraud has become frequent, including fraud under the pretext of trade, such as financial instruments resembling unlisted stocks and corporate bonds. Since then, the number of confirmed cases and total losses for special fraud in general has continued to increase. Total losses in 2013 were approximately 48.95 billion yen, the highest to date.

Elucidation of the criminal group as a whole is difficult so as not to leave behind traces of contact even within the group.

In addition, various services are abused in special fraud to accommodate aspects of

Various services abused in criminal acts of special fraud

Trends in the number of confirmed special fraud cases/total losses (2004–2013)

Group	Year	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Overall no. of confirmed cases of special fraud (cases)	25,667	21,612	19,020	17,930	20,481	7,340	6,888	7,216	8,693	11,998
Remittance fraud	25,667	21,612	19,020	17,930	20,481	7,340	6,637	6,233	6,348	9,204
Special fraud other than remittance fraud	-	-	-	-	-	-	251	983	2,345	2,794
Total losses from all special fraud (100M yen)	283.8	251.5	254.9	251.4	275.9	95.8	112.5	204.0	364.4	489.5
Remittance fraud	283.8	251.5	254.9	251.4	275.9	95.8	100.9	127.2	160.4	258.7
Special fraud other than remittance fraud	-	-	-	-	-	-	11.6	76.9	204.0	230.8

Note: Special fraud other than remittance fraud was totaled from February 2010.

## (2) Issues in Special Fraud Investigations

Criminal groups that carry out special fraud, particularly leaders and core members, take on different roles, such as the role of the person who repeatedly phones and dupes the victim, and the role of the person who goes to a home or other location to receive the cash. Criminal acts. Call forwarding services and rental mobile phones are abused as means of contacting the victim, and postal and parcel delivery services, savings accounts in another person's name, and commercial mail receiving agencies are abused as ways to receive fraudulently gained money.
## 4 Issues Concerning Organized Crime Investigations

(1) Issues on Boryokudan Crime Investigations

In investigations of Boryokudan crime, there are issues concerning not only how to arrest perpetrators, but also concerning how to figure out the organizational activities including the organization’s sources of funding and high-ranking persons involved.

However, activities of Boryokudan have been diversifying and becoming more secretive because the Boryokudan have infiltrated into a variety of private sectors while concealing their organizational backgrounds, as well as exploited affiliate corporations and collaborators for funding. In addition, information on Boryokudan organizations, and statements from victims of Boryokudan crimes have been difficult to obtain because they are vigilant against police crackdowns and strengthen controls against members.

## (2) Issues on Investigations on Drug Offenses

Drug offenses tend to stay unrevealed since they do not have direct victims and are generally carried out secretly. Often, it is difficult for law enforcement agencies to grasp clues in cases.

In addition, in many cases, drug offenses are conducted by criminal organizations such as Boryokudan and foreign criminal organizations. These organizations tend to take defensive measures including division of labor, such as the transport and storage of drugs, sophistication of command structure, and instructing what to testify if arrested. This makes it difficult to figure out the details of their activities and supply routes.

Furthermore, in addition to smuggling cases that use shrewd deception methods such as hiding drugs in the carry-on luggage of aircraft passengers, there are also cases where drug couriers deny the awareness of participation in smuggling.

Stimulants concealed in a modified briefcase
## Section 2: Changes in the Environment Surrounding Police Investigations

Due to changes in the environment surrounding police investigations, it is difficult to trace criminals, and the modality of police investigations has itself been forced to change. Thus, the focus is on reforms to systems and changes in the social landscape that impact police investigations.

## 1 Changes in the Social Landscape

(1) The Weakening of Human Relationships in Regional Society

As the number of single households increases in accordance with the advancement of an ageing society and population influx from regional areas to cities, there is a growing weakening of human relationships in regional society. In this way, it has become harder for the police to obtain important information through traditional investigative methods such as canvassing, and the number of cleared criminal cases that start with canvassing to arrest a suspect has greatly declined.

On the other hand, in recent years security cameras are now being placed in locations open to the general public, such as in train stations and convenience stores, and they have come to play an important role in securing the safety of the public.

Trends in the number of arrests for criminal offenses that start with canvassing to arrest a suspect (1993–2013)

Note: Excludes unsentenced crime cases and settled cases.

(2) Various Services Abused as Means for Untraceable Offenses

### I. Mobile Phones

Mobile phones have rapidly become popularized, and the number of subscribers keeps rising. There are cases of unlawfully entering into a mobile phone contract by means such as utilizing a fake form of identification, changing the name through fake adoption, using the name of a dummy company, and instances where rental mobile phone businesses do not thoroughly confirm the identity of the user. Thus, it is difficult to identify the mobile phone subscriber/user.

Amid this, mobile phones are frequently being abused in crimes as a means that does not leave any traces of the offense. For example, the National Police Agency conducted a survey on names used for mobile phones possessed by suspects from criminal groups involved in special fraud cases cleared by the prefectural police nationwide. It showed that from May 1–May 31, 2013 approximately 60% of the mobile phones were in another person's name.

Names used for mobile phones in the possession of suspects from criminal groups perpetrating special fraud (May 2013)

### I I. Internet

Amid an increasing number of Internet users, the anonymity of the Internet is being abused in criminal offenses.

### I II. Other Services

Just like mobile phones, savings accounts are being abused as a means to collect and send criminal proceeds. They are opened by persons pretending to be fictitious persons or third parties or legitimately opened accounts are bought and sold.

In addition, recently a delivery receiving service, called a commercial mail receiving agency, has become popularized and is being abused for purposes such as serving as a place to send fraudulently gained money and passbooks for savings accounts that are unlawfully traded.
## 2 Reforms in Systems Involving Police Investigations

## (1) Changes in the Environment Involving Investigations

In a succession of judicial system reforms, while the lay judge system was introduced, cases of denial have been increasing and the environment involving investigation is changing at a dizzying speed. In addition, the police are trying audiovisual recordings in investigations to review an approach that contributes to effective/efficient proof of credibility and the voluntary nature of statements in trials by lay judges.

Denial rate of persons finally disposed in ordinary first-instance cases (2003–2012)

Note: Restricted to district courts

Source: Judicial statistics

the percentage of persons denying guilt when the procedural steps in an ordinary first instance case are concluded is trending up. The role played by investigation is significant in the elucidation of facts in a case and the acquisition of information on unsentenced crimes, but this increase in cases of denial shows that it is becoming difficult to determine facts through police investigations at the investigative stage.

### I I. Actions Taken by Lawyers for Suspects

The court-appointed defense counsel system for suspects was introduced in October 2006. The appointment of a public defender from the investigative stage enables the lawyer to grasp points at issue early on, and improves and expedites criminal trials.

Since that system was introduced in 2006, the total annual number of detainees has decreased, but the number of meetings between detainees and lawyers continues to increase.

### I II. The Introduction of the Lay Judge System and the Trial-based Audiovisual Recordings of Interrogations

To review an approach that contributes to effective/efficient proof that statements were made voluntarily in trials by lay judges, the police have begun the trial-based audiovisual recordings of interrogations. All the prefectural police have been implementing the trial-based audiovisual recordings since April 2009.

Number of meetings between detainees and lawyers, etc. (2006–2013)

Note: Includes cases of non-institution of prosecution.