wanyu/IteraTeR_v2 huggingface dataset:
Original:  (g) not only a distinction by legitimacy mentioned above, this provision is resulting in distinctions also by two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality according to this Act.
Revised:  (g) this provision is resulting in distinctions also by two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality according to this Act.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:  (g) not only a distinction by legitimacy mentioned above, this provision is resulting in distinctions also by two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality according to this Act.
Revised:  (g) not only a distinction by legitimacy mentioned above, this provision is resulting in distinctions not only as to legitimacy but also as to two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality according to this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  (g) not only a distinction by legitimacy mentioned above, this provision is resulting in distinctions also by two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality according to this Act.
Revised:  (g) not only a distinction by legitimacy mentioned above, this provision is resulting in distinctions also by two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality provided by this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  (h) while this Act provides that a child under such situations may be naturalized with fewer conditions,  it doesn't justify the relation  , because naturalization is within discretion of the Minister of Justice.
Revised:  (h) another provision in this Act states a child in this situation may be naturalized with fewer conditions, it doesn't justify the relation , because naturalization is within discretion of the Minister of Justice.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  (h) while this Act provides that a child under such situations may be naturalized with fewer conditions,  it doesn't justify the relation  , because naturalization is within discretion of the Minister of Justice.
Revised:  (h) while this Act provides that a child under such situations may be naturalized with fewer conditions, but it doesn't justify the relation , because naturalization is within discretion of the Minister of Justice.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:  One judge in the majority  supported the conclusion, but pointed out non-existence of due legislation as two opposites did.
Revised:  One judge in the majority , who supported the conclusion, but pointed out non-existence of due legislation as two opposites did.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:  The former judge concluded that fixing this hole can be done by the Judiciary because it doesn't betray the basic decision of the Legislation shown by this Act.
Revised:  The former judge concluded that the Judiciary can remedy the lack, because it doesn't betray the basic decision of the Legislation shown by this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The former judge concluded that fixing this hole can be done by the Judiciary because it doesn't betray the basic decision of the Legislation shown by this Act.
Revised:  The former judge concluded that fixing this hole can be done by the Judiciary because it doesn't betray the will of the Legislation shown by this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The former judge concluded that fixing this hole can be done by the Judiciary because it doesn't betray the basic decision of the Legislation shown by this Act.
Revised:  The former judge concluded that fixing this hole can be done by the Judiciary because it doesn't betray the basic decision of the Legislation of the Diet as to this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The latter two opposites concluded that fixing this hole is within discretion of the Legislation  .
Revised:  .
Edit intent: coherence
Original:  They argued that even if it's unconstitutional, the  appeal is to be dismissed, following the opinion above by the two opposites.
Revised:  They argued that even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the opinion above by the two opposites.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: Japan's Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the children plaintiffs of Japan's nationality.
Revised: Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the children plaintiffs of Japan's nationality.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: Japan's Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the children plaintiffs of Japan's nationality.
Revised: Japan's Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  They had filed claims for Japan's nationality between 2003 and 2005, but the government turned down because the parents had not legally married in each case.
Revised:  They had filed claims for Japanese nationality between 2003 and 2005, but the government turned down because the parents had not legally married in each case.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by  Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Revised: The Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by  Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Revised:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by an Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by  Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Revised:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and confirmed the nationality of the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by  Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children of Japanese nationality .
Revised:  Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and assured the plaintiff's children .
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Each of the ten plaintiffs was born of a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Revised:  Each of the ten plaintiffs was born to a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  According to Japan's Act on nationality, a non-Japanese child (under 20) who was legitimated by marriage and acknowledgement can acquire Japan's nationality by filing notification, with some requirements which the plaintiffs had already fulfilled.
Revised:  According to Japan's Act on nationality, a non-Japanese child (under 20) who was legitimated by marriage and acknowledgment can acquire Japan's nationality by filing notification, with some requirements which the plaintiffs had already fulfilled.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:   Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition of 'legitimacy by marriage' is resulting in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Revised:  The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition of 'legitimacy by marriage' is resulting in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:   Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition of 'legitimacy by marriage' is resulting in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Revised:  Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition of 'legitimacy by marriage' results in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:   Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision , and accepted the plaintiffs' claim for Japan's nationality.
Revised:  The Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision , and accepted the plaintiffs' claim for Japan's nationality.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:   Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision , and accepted the plaintiffs' claim for Japan's nationality.
Revised:  Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision and accepted the plaintiffs' claim for Japan's nationality.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  +According to Japan's Act on nationality: Father Mother Parents Acknowledgement Japan's nationality is any Japanese not legally married needless automatically granted by birth.
Revised:  +According to Japan's Act on nationality: Father Mother Parents Acknowledgment Japan's nationality is any Japanese not legally married needless automatically granted by birth.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The Wednesday's judgment was a major opinion of ten among fifteen judges.
Revised:  Wednesday's judgment was a major opinion of ten among fifteen judges.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Five opposites thought more highly of the legislative power of the Diet.
Revised:  The five dissenting thought more highly of the legislative power of the Diet.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: The Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by an Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and confirmed the nationality of the plaintiff's children . Each of the ten plaintiffs  was born to a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Revised: The Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by an Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and confirmed the nationality of the plaintiffs . Each of the ten plaintiffs was born to a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Edit intent: clarity
Original: The Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by an Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and confirmed the nationality of the plaintiff's children . Each of the ten plaintiffs  was born to a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Revised: The Supreme Court of Japan ruled on Wednesday that a condition imposed by an Act on nationality is unconstitutional, and confirmed the nationality of the plaintiff's children . Each of the ten plaintiffs is a child who was born to a Filipino mother and later acknowledged by a Japanese father.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  According to Japan's Act on nationality, a non-Japanese child (under 20) who was legitimated by marriage and acknowledgment can acquire Japan's nationality by filing notification, with some requirements which the plaintiffs had already fulfilled.
Revised:  According to Japan's Act on nationality, a non-Japanese child (under 20) who was legitimated by marriage and acknowledgment can acquire Japanese nationality by filing notification, with some requirements which the plaintiffs had already fulfilled.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition of 'legitimacy by marriage' results in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Revised:  The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the condition 'legitimated by marriage' results in unreasonable distinctions to violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which guarantees equality under the law.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision and accepted the plaintiffs' claim for Japan's nationality.
Revised:  The Supreme Court left effective the rest of this provision and accepted the plaintiffs' claims for Japanese nationality.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  +According to Japan's Act on nationality: Father Mother Parents Acknowledgment Japan's nationality is any Japanese not legally married needless automatically granted by birth.
Revised:  +According to Japan's Act on nationality: Father Mother Parents Acknowledgment Japanese nationality is any Japanese not legally married needless automatically granted by birth.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The ten plaintiffs filed their appeal through lawyers after Tokyo High Court dismissed their claim in February, 2007.
Revised:  The ten plaintiffs filed their appeals through lawyers after Tokyo High Court dismissed their claim in February, 2007.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  The ten plaintiffs filed their appeal through lawyers after Tokyo High Court dismissed their claim in February, 2007.
Revised:  The ten plaintiffs filed their appeal through lawyers after Tokyo High Court dismissed their claims in February, 2007.
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  One judge in the majority and five opposites shared one view in common, but their opinions are different.
Revised:  The five and one in the majority and five opposites shared one view in common, but their opinions are different.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  One judge in the majority and five opposites shared one view in common, but their opinions are different.
Revised:  One judge in the majority shared one view in common, but their opinions are different.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Revised:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Major opinion 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Revised:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Revised:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Dissenting opinions2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation Opposites 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Revised:  distinction is This distinction is caused by Removing this condition is Majority 9 unconstitutional an excessive condition in this provision within the scope of the Judiciary Majority 1unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Judiciary Opposites 2 unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation 3 not unconstitutional non-existence of a provision within the scope of the Legislation The judgment is to say:
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  (a) while it's within the scope of the Legislation of the Diet how conditions are set for acquiring / losing Japan's nationality (Article 10), a distinction without rational reasons brought by such a condition may be unconstitutional (Article 14: Paragraph 1).
Revised:  (a) while it's within the scope of the Legislation of the Diet how conditions are set for acquiring / losing Japanese nationality (Article 10), a distinction without rational reasons brought by such a condition may be unconstitutional (Article 14: Paragraph 1).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  (g) this provision is resulting in distinctions not only as to legitimacy but also as to two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality provided by this Act.
Revised:  (g) this provision results in distinctions not only as to legitimacy but also as to two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality provided by this Act.
Edit intent: coherence
Original:  (g) this provision is resulting in distinctions not only as to legitimacy but also as to two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japan's nationality provided by this Act.
Revised:  (g) this provision is resulting in distinctions not only as to legitimacy but also as to two other factors: any non-Japanese child without legitimacy acknowledged before its birth by a Japanese father, and any child without legitimacy born of a Japanese mother, can acquire Japanese nationality provided by this Act.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  One judge in the majority, who supported the conclusion, shared a view with five opposites : the distinction as to legitimacy is caused by non-existence of due legislation.
Revised:  One judge in the majority, who supported the conclusion, shared a view with the five dissenting : the distinction as to legitimacy is caused by non-existence of due legislation.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  Two opposites of the five concluded that these distinctions are unconstitutional, but correction of it depends, in principle, on legislative measures by the Diet.
Revised:  Two dissenting judges of the five concluded that these distinctions are unconstitutional, but correction of it depends, in principle, on legislative measures by the Diet.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  The other opinion of three opposites is contrary to the major opinion.
Revised:  The other opinion of three dissenting judges is contrary to the major opinion.
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choices of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the viewpoint of two other opposites . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Revised:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choice of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the viewpoint of two other opposites . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choices of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the viewpoint of two other opposites . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Revised:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choices of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeals are to be dismissed, following the viewpoint of two other opposites . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Edit intent: fluency
Original:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choices of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the viewpoint of two other opposites . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Revised:  They argued, for example, the distinction as to legitimacy is not unconstitutional and is within the range of choices of legislative measures. even if it's unconstitutional, the plaintiffs' appeal is to be dismissed, following the viewpoint in the other dissenting opinion . it's dubious whether or how people in Japan have been making changes as in (d).
Edit intent: clarity
Original:  it's rational to offer Japan's nationality in two other situations as in (g). easy naturalization as in (h) to offer Japan's nationality is rational both as a measure and in practice. foreign countries' movement as in (f) is not to be instantly reflected in judgment on constitutionality;
Revised:  it's rational to offer Japanese nationality in two other situations as in (g). easy naturalization as in (h) to offer Japan's nationality is rational both as a measure and in practice. foreign countries' movement as in (f) is not to be instantly reflected in judgment on constitutionality;
Edit intent: fluency