(Provisional Translation)
Financial Services Agency
| (case.1) | The Guidelines for Major Bank Supervision already specified, in the paragraph entitled ''Information Provision and Consultation for Customer Protection,'' clear supervisory checkpoints relating to cases of mis-selling when it was found that certain banks mis-sold financial products, including deposits, failing to explain their risks and provide important information to customers. |
| (case.2) | The Guidelines for Insurance Companies Supervision already specified, in the paragraphs entitled ''management system for insurance payment operation'' and ''system for insurance solicitation,'' clear supervisory checkpoints when it was found that certain insurance companies conducted improper non-payments. |
| (note 1) | As of March 31, 2008, the FSA's No Action Letter system have received 28 requests since its introduction in July 2001. Among them, five requests concern the Securities and Exchange Act (currently the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act) and the cabinet orders for the enforcement of the Act. |
| (note 2) | Additional elements of ''written inquiry procedures for general legal interpretation,'' when compared to the No Action Letter system, include the following: |
|
| (note) | In addition, administrative appeal based on Article 6 of the Administrative Tribunals Examination Law and judicial appeal based on Article 8 of the Law on Suits against the government are available. |
1. Prior to taking administrative action, the FSA, as a first step, considers the following aspects, so as to identify the appropriate measures to take.
iSeriousness and Maliciousness of the Conduct
The extent of the damage to public interests
Whether the financial institution is substantially undermining public interest, such as undermining confidence in the financial market by developing and providing products that are severely inappropriate in view of proper disclosure of a customer's financial position.
The extent of damage to customers' interests
Whether numerous customers have incurred damages on a wide scale, and to what extent each individual customer has incurred damages.
Maliciousness of the conduct
Whether the financial institution's act was malicious - for example, whether it continued to sell similar products despite receiving many complaints from customers.
Length and frequency of conduct
Whether the act was performed over a long or short period of time, and whether it was performed repeatedly/continuously, or rather a one-off event.
Existence of intention
Whether the act was performed intentionally with awareness of its illegality and inappropriateness, or due to negligence.
Organized involvement
Whether the act was performed based on a personal decision by the sales staff on the floor, or whether a manager was involved as well; whether the top management was involved therein.
Concealment of conduct
Whether there were any attempts to cover up the problem after it was recognized; and if so, whether it was organized.
Involvement with antisocial forces
Whether there was any involvement with antisocial forces, and if so, the extent of their involvement.
iiAppropriateness of Governance Systems and Operational Control Systems causing or contributing to the violation
Whether presidents and the board of directors fully recognize the importance of compliance and take necessary initiatives to ensure compliance
Whether internal audit structures are adequately established and whether they work in a reliable manner
Whether compliance and risk management structures are well organized and function effectively
Whether operational staff recognize the importance of compliance and whether internal education programs are adequately provided to employees
iiiMitigating Factors
In addition to the above, whether there are any mitigating factors, such as, whether the financial institution is itself making necessary efforts to protect customers in a voluntary fashion prior to administrative responses.
In particular, in cases where the financial institution is making voluntary efforts in an appropriate manner based on the principles that have been shared with the authorities, this fact will be taken into consideration as a mitigating factor.
2. In consideration of the factors referred to in 1. above and after looking into whether there are any other factors that should be taken into account, we ultimately decide on administrative action by examining the following:
(1)Whether it is appropriate to let the financial institutions concerned make voluntary efforts to achieve the necessary improvements in their business operations.
(2)Whether considerable efforts are required in terms of the business improvement and whether it is necessary to have the financial institution concentrate intensively on implementation of business improvements for a certain period of time.
(3)Whether it is appropriate to allow the financial institution to continue its business operations.