Colabo’s Yumeno Nito Reacts Strongly to Defamation Ruling After Court Finds Deliberate Fall Claim Established
She had just won another defamation case
Yumeno Nito, a social activist and representative director of the general incorporated association “Colabo,” is also known as a popular influencer with 87,000 followers on X, for her work protecting and supporting teenage girls who have experienced abuse and sexual exploitation toward self-reliance.
On March 27, she suffered a loss in a defamation and portrait rights lawsuit filed against her.
Nito had recently won a Supreme Court case on March 12 in which she sought damages against a man using the name “Himasora Akane” for defamatory posts, securing a ruling ordering 2.2 million yen in compensation and deletion of the posts. She had commented on the Colabo website:
“I hope that accumulating victories will help restore social credibility.”
However, she then lost the defamation case brought against her.
The plaintiff was a professional athlete identified as “A.” He claimed that five posts made by Nito on X after July 27 of the previous year constituted defamation and violation of portrait rights, seeking damages and deletion of the posts. The Tokyo District Court ordered Nito to pay 330,000 yen and to delete the five posts in question.
The incident originated on July 17, 2025, during a street speech in Bunkyo Ward, Tokyo, by Saya (real name: Sayaka Shioiri), a member of the Sanseito party.
After loud chants of “1, 2, Sanseito!” from supporters and the end of the speech, Nito held up a placard reading “No nuclear weapons” and “Stop discrimination!” and approached Shioiri in protest.
As the scene became chaotic, economic commentator Takaaki Mitsuhashi, who had been watching the speech, stepped in to prevent Nito from getting closer to Shioiri. Mitsuhashi moved forward with his arms outstretched to block her, resulting in contact between them. Nito then fell backward onto the ground.
At first glance, the incident appeared to be a confrontation between Nito and Mitsuhashi alone. However, Nito also identified a third party, A, who was watching the speech nearby, as involved in the incident.
On July 27, Nito posted on X:
“At the July 17 Sanseito street speech, I was assaulted by party members and supporters. The man (Mitsuhashi) and a woman who assaulted me together are racists who are a professional athlete.”
She further wrote that the woman “repeatedly punched me from behind and pushed me toward the man, causing me to fall,” and also shared A’s YouTube link and face photo. She additionally referred to A’s alleged intention to run in a future local election and criticized her publicly. A later filed a lawsuit against Nito for defamation and violation of portrait rights.
FRIDAY Digital obtained court documents from the Tokyo District Court ruling issued on March 27 and reported in detail on the facts revealed in the trial.
“The court recognized it as simulation (diving) in soccer.”
The main point of dispute in court was whether any assault had actually taken place. After reviewing the video evidence, the Tokyo District Court concluded that there had been no assault and that Nito had fallen intentionally.
The judgment stated:
“It cannot be recognized that the plaintiff committed assault against the defendant. While it is true that the plaintiff made a pushing motion against the defendant, this was a defensive action to prevent what would otherwise have been a chain-like collapse, as the defendant had moved backward toward the plaintiff’s side. This cannot reasonably be regarded as assault.”
It further stated:
“From the video evidence, no particular cause for falling can be identified, yet the defendant falls. Therefore, similar to a soccer simulation (diving), it is reasonable to conclude that the defendant intentionally fell in order to create the appearance of being assaulted, despite not having been assaulted.”
In other words, the judge compared it to a “soccer simulation” (diving), a deceptive act in football where a player pretends to have been fouled in order to gain an advantage such as a free kick.
Nito had also submitted a medical certificate diagnosing her with a 10-day recovery period for injuries including a bruise on the right hand, lower back, and both buttocks. However, the court also addressed this point:
“The medical certificate only contains subjective complaints. In light of the circumstances of the fall described above, even if an injury did occur, it would be limited to minor bruising, and it cannot be recognized that an injury requiring approximately 10 days of recovery actually occurred. The certificate appears to be based on exaggerated complaints.”
In other words, the court found that the X post in which she wrote:
“She punched me from behind multiple times and pushed me toward the man assaulting me, causing me to fall,”
was not true.
Fact finding that the purpose was election interference
The court also addressed why Nito had claimed it was an assault incident in the first place, stating:
“It is sufficiently recognized that the defendant, for the purpose of obstructing Sanseito’s election activities, created a false narrative of an assault incident and presented it as if it actually occurred.”
The term created (sakushutsu) used by the court means deliberately fabricating something that did not exist—namely, that she intentionally constructed a false assault incident for political purposes and presented it as fact. The court therefore concluded that this was not a mere misunderstanding, but a deliberate claim of a non-existent assault.
The court further criticized her X posts, stating:
“Although the plaintiff’s profile and appearance were publicly known, the posts identified the plaintiff and disseminated their image while labeling them as an assault perpetrator based on facts that did not exist. This exceeds socially acceptable limits and constitutes an infringement of reputation, privacy, and portrait rights.”
The Tokyo District Court ordered Nito to pay 330,000 yen in damages (300,000 yen in compensation and 30,000 yen in legal fees) and to delete all five disputed posts on X.
The plaintiff had sought 3.3 million yen in damages, but the awarded amount was one-tenth of that. The court’s reasoning for limiting the compensation was, ironically, based on the video evidence Nito herself had attached as “proof.” The judgment stated:
“Since the defendant herself attached part of the video in question to her posts, it is sufficiently recognizable to the general viewer that she was not actually assaulted but was instead acting as if she had been. Therefore, the extent to which the plaintiff’s social reputation was damaged is limited, and those who would believe the defendant’s posts are limited to her supporters.”
In other words, the video she posted as evidence of assault ended up functioning, for many viewers, as proof of fabrication.
The ruling also noted that her posts received comments such as “Isn’t this just self-staged injury?” from general users.
Regarding this judgment, influencer Takizawa Gareso posted on X: “Yumeno Nito has been officially recognized by the court as a ‘lying activist’ (we are here now),” which reportedly gained over 5.04 million impressions as of April 30. The ruling quickly became a major topic of discussion online.
Nito’s legal team strongly countered, arguing that the facts have been distorted
The Tokyo District Court delivered a ruling that went as far as describing the case as self-staged, but the legal dispute is not yet over. Nito’s side has already filed an appeal with the Tokyo High Court, disputing the first-instance judgment.
FRIDAY Digital sent a written inquiry to Nito to ask for her views following the ruling. Through her attorney, a response was provided. Regarding the reasons for the appeal, it stated:
“There are many points of disagreement with the judgment, but we believe the most serious error is the finding that no assault occurred despite the fact that she was assaulted.”
She continues to insist that the assault did in fact take place. Regarding the court’s characterization of the incident as “simulation (acting),” the response stated:
“We find it extremely regrettable and cannot understand why the facts have been distorted to such an extent.”
Regarding the court’s finding of a motive involving election interference, she strongly rejected it, stating:
“We are deeply angered that an entirely unfounded purpose has been attributed to us.”
She was also asked whether she intended to apologize to A or delete the posts, to which her side responded, “We have no such intention.” As justification, they cited that in a prior provisional injunction case, the judge had recommended that A withdraw the request for deletion, which she did. They further stated:
“We intend to demonstrate the errors in the first-instance judgment during the appeal process.”
Meanwhile, A’s legal representatives declined to comment, stating, “We are unable to provide comments or interviews regarding this matter.”
While the court of first instance concluded based on video evidence that the incident was a “deliberate fall,” Nito’s side maintains that the ruling distorts the facts, turning the case into a deepening legal dispute. The next decision from the High Court will be closely watched.
PHOTO： Kyodo News Interview and text by： Shinsuke Sakai