Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1995, page 52
because UCY had forbidden PA to speak about her donation to anyone, PA could not seek
related counsel or advice from anyone, and thus chose to live and bear the consequences
alone.
PA went to the Kasugabara Dojo occasionally. More frequently though, people were going
and coming to PA‟s domicile to offer prayers and alms to the Maitreya statue PA had
purchased. During this time, an Oasis Society member ordered PA to bring her daughter to
the Oasis Society. Also, PA was requested by a follower of Tenchi Seikyo to quit her job at a
company (where she had begun working in September 1988), and to come to the said Dojo.
Both mother and child were then ordered to join the UC. In addition, PA was requested to
make further costly donations and cash loans.
In response to all the above, PA deliberated that if she continued attending the above Dojo
and so forth, her future would be unstable. Ergo, PA completely stopped going to the above
Dojo in January 1989. It was after this decision that PA began to consider a way by which
she might have her donation money refunded. Accordingly, PA demanded a certain person
by the name of Ishii (the “deacon” of the Kasugabara Dojo), UCX, and UCY to issue her a
receipt for the amount of donation monies documented in this lawsuit. Around April of 1989,
Ishii personally handed to PA at the PA residence a receipt for 30,000,000 yen written out
under the name “UC Fukuoka Church.”
Around August 1989, PA engaged an attorney to help her recover the above-said donated
monies et al. The following is a list of recovered damages, each gained vis-a-vis out-of-
court settlements:
(1991.5.30) In retribution for the cost of a wall painting: Recovered a sum of
220,000 yen from Miyabi Co., Ltd.
(1991.1.25) In retribution for donated monies: Recovered a sum of 5,000,000 yen
from ReiSeki Aikokai.
(1991.1.18) In retribution for the cost of a Maitreya statue and rosary beads, and
for the cost of signature seals: Recovered a sum of 5,130,000 yen and 200,000
yen, respectively, from Toa Shoji.
In retribution for donated monies: Recovered a sum of 1,870,000 yen from Tenchi
Seikyo.
All the above statements are recognized as true and valid.
[Counterargument of the UC concerning the 30,000,000-yen donation]
First, the UC held that the demand for the 30,000,000-yen donation was made on the same
day from 10:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., during which interval (1) whether or not PA believed in
Sun Myung Moon and the UC doctrine was clarified, (2) PA‟s faith in and understanding of
the “unification principles” was judged to be sufficient by Endo, (3) Endo explained to PA the
purpose of the donation monies, (4) PA‟s intent to cooperate to this end was confirmed
several times, (5) the sum of 30,000,000 yen was presented to PA as determined from the
beginning upon consideration of her assets, and (6) PA‟s consent to the 30,000,000-yen
donation was procured by Endo.
Furthermore, the defendant UC denied that there were any other persons aside from Endo
and Tokunaga in the room at the time when Endo requested PA‟s donation. The UC also
refuted that Endo repeatedly left his seat (and the room), and that UCY and/or Tokunaga
held PA‟s hands tightly while saying (among other things), “Hang in there. Don‟t give up.”
Ergo, the UC insisted that PA could have easily left the room at any time. This claim is
supported by the testimonies of witnesses UCY and the above Endo, as well as by several
exhibits of proof submitted by the UC.
because UCY had forbidden PA to speak about her donation to anyone, PA could not seek
related counsel or advice from anyone, and thus chose to live and bear the consequences
alone.
PA went to the Kasugabara Dojo occasionally. More frequently though, people were going
and coming to PA‟s domicile to offer prayers and alms to the Maitreya statue PA had
purchased. During this time, an Oasis Society member ordered PA to bring her daughter to
the Oasis Society. Also, PA was requested by a follower of Tenchi Seikyo to quit her job at a
company (where she had begun working in September 1988), and to come to the said Dojo.
Both mother and child were then ordered to join the UC. In addition, PA was requested to
make further costly donations and cash loans.
In response to all the above, PA deliberated that if she continued attending the above Dojo
and so forth, her future would be unstable. Ergo, PA completely stopped going to the above
Dojo in January 1989. It was after this decision that PA began to consider a way by which
she might have her donation money refunded. Accordingly, PA demanded a certain person
by the name of Ishii (the “deacon” of the Kasugabara Dojo), UCX, and UCY to issue her a
receipt for the amount of donation monies documented in this lawsuit. Around April of 1989,
Ishii personally handed to PA at the PA residence a receipt for 30,000,000 yen written out
under the name “UC Fukuoka Church.”
Around August 1989, PA engaged an attorney to help her recover the above-said donated
monies et al. The following is a list of recovered damages, each gained vis-a-vis out-of-
court settlements:
(1991.5.30) In retribution for the cost of a wall painting: Recovered a sum of
220,000 yen from Miyabi Co., Ltd.
(1991.1.25) In retribution for donated monies: Recovered a sum of 5,000,000 yen
from ReiSeki Aikokai.
(1991.1.18) In retribution for the cost of a Maitreya statue and rosary beads, and
for the cost of signature seals: Recovered a sum of 5,130,000 yen and 200,000
yen, respectively, from Toa Shoji.
In retribution for donated monies: Recovered a sum of 1,870,000 yen from Tenchi
Seikyo.
All the above statements are recognized as true and valid.
[Counterargument of the UC concerning the 30,000,000-yen donation]
First, the UC held that the demand for the 30,000,000-yen donation was made on the same
day from 10:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., during which interval (1) whether or not PA believed in
Sun Myung Moon and the UC doctrine was clarified, (2) PA‟s faith in and understanding of
the “unification principles” was judged to be sufficient by Endo, (3) Endo explained to PA the
purpose of the donation monies, (4) PA‟s intent to cooperate to this end was confirmed
several times, (5) the sum of 30,000,000 yen was presented to PA as determined from the
beginning upon consideration of her assets, and (6) PA‟s consent to the 30,000,000-yen
donation was procured by Endo.
Furthermore, the defendant UC denied that there were any other persons aside from Endo
and Tokunaga in the room at the time when Endo requested PA‟s donation. The UC also
refuted that Endo repeatedly left his seat (and the room), and that UCY and/or Tokunaga
held PA‟s hands tightly while saying (among other things), “Hang in there. Don‟t give up.”
Ergo, the UC insisted that PA could have easily left the room at any time. This claim is
supported by the testimonies of witnesses UCY and the above Endo, as well as by several
exhibits of proof submitted by the UC.
