Skip to main content

This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.
If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Review Meeting (4th)

Since five years have passed since the enforcement of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney (Act No. 64 of 2017), the Committee on the Status of Enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act will be held pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney in order to inspect the status of enforcement and examine future directions.

Overview

  • Date and time: November 7, 2023 (Tue) from 10:00 to 12:00
  • Location: Online
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Proceedings
    3. Exchange of opinions toward the compilation of the results of the study
    4. Adjournment

Event Information

Materials

Relevant policies

Minutes

Date

Wednesday, November 7, 2023, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Location

Online

Attendees

  • UEHARA Tetsutaro (Professor, Faculty of Information Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan University)
  • Soshi Hamaguchi (Senior Staff Member, Keio University SFC Research Institute)
  • Hiroshi Miyauchi (Attorney, Miyauchi & Mizumachi IT Law Office)
  • Rie Yamaguchi (Associate Professor, Graduate School of Information Science and Engineering, The University of
  • Keiko Itakura (Head of Security, Medley Corporate Design Department, Inc.)
  • Reiko Kasai (Manager, Digital Solution Promotion Department, LAWSON Incubation Company, Inc.)

Minutes

Digital Agency Tonami:
Now that it is on time, we will hold the fourth meeting of the Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Status Review Committee. Thank you for coming today despite your busy schedule.

I am Tonami from Digital Agency, and I will serve as the secretariat. Nice to meet you.

Before the meeting, I would like to confirm today's materials. We have distributed the agenda and Material 1 to all Committee members. These materials are also posted on the Digital Agency website, so please check them if you attend the meeting.
Then, I would like to ask Chairman Uehara to proceed with the proceedings from now on. Thank you very much.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you for gathering today. Today, I would like to hold a meeting to exchange opinions in order to summarize the results of the study. Thank you very much.

First of all, I would like to ask for an explanation from the Secretariat on agenda 1.

Digital Agency Tonami:
I would now like to explain Agenda 1 in accordance with the outline of Material 1: Implementation Status Report.
As for the flow, we will explain the points we would like you to discuss today, explain the draft table of contents of the implementation status report, and summarize the Issue of the electronic power of attorney and the direction of response. We will explain the outline, the Issue of the use of the electronic power of attorney in the electronic contract and the direction of response, the Issue of the use of the electronic power of attorney in online application and the direction of response, and other Issue and the direction of response.

First of all, as the background and points I would like you to discuss today, in accordance with the Table of Contents (draft) of the Implementation Status Report shown at the previous Review Meeting, I have organized the Issue of the electronic power of attorney and the response to it, which I received opinions in the first to third meetings. This is based on the classification of the opinions received so far into the response to Issue and Issue, and the correspondence between them.

What I would like you to discuss today is whether the response to Issue is an appropriate response to resolve Issue, whether the response is to resolve Issue, and whether there is a more appropriate response to Issue. Among the many Issue that have been responded to so far, which Issue should be implemented with a particularly high priority and what response should be taken? In addition to the discussions so far, if there are any other Issue that should be resolved, I would also like you to touch on these points this time.

This is a table of contents (draft) of the implementation status report.

As the overall flow of the implementation status report, I would like to first explain the background of the consideration, and then make a report on the status of certification pertaining to Article 5 of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act as the implementation status of the electronic power of attorney, the situation and status of use of the electronic power of attorney, and the efforts related to the responsibilities of the national government, etc.

In addition, in 3. Direction of arrangement and response to Issue, I am writing a report on electronic contracts, online application, and other Issue in common, dividing them into directions of response to Issue and Issue, respectively.

This summarizes the Issue of electronic power of attorney and the direction of response.

We have classified two or three items each for Electronic Contracts and online application and Other Issue into Your Opinions and Issue. We plan to reorganize the Issue and response classifications based on the opinions this time.

First of all, I would like to explain about Issue regarding the spread of electronic power of attorney in electronic contracts.

As for Issue's opinion on the spread of electronic power of attorney in general electronic contracts, we have received opinions on the ease of use, opinions on the hindrance of electronic contracts themselves, opinions on the need to understand the history of use leading to the use of electronic power of attorney, opinions on the need to show the situation of use in BtoB and the advantages thereof, opinions on the possibility that electronic power of attorney can be used in the form of electronic employee ID, and opinions on the need for some measures to spread electronic signatures, which do not have a touch feeling unlike stamps.

As a response to this Issue, through hearings and survey with companies using electronic power of attorney and electronic contract services, the Issue of electronic contracts will be organized into points such as interoperability, UX, system design, and process improvement premised on digital, and necessary measures such as public relations activities by the government and the development of guidelines will be considered.

In addition, regarding the electronic employee ID card and the Issue related to the sense of touch, we have proposed that we should consider how to use it in practice, such as using an electronic power of attorney as an electronic employee ID card, using an electronic contract, and using it as a signature of an executive in a company, in the formulation and development of the guidelines that I will explain later, and that we should describe the guidelines.

With regard to Issue in terms of texture, we would like to respond to Issue through initiatives No. 1 and No. 2 and, in particular, efforts to formulate guidelines.

In addition, regarding the Issue related to the dissemination of electronic power of attorney in electronic contracts in general, the related Issue is described below.

This is Issue about documents such as guidelines.

Based on the opinions we have received so far, we have received opinions that the use cases of electronic power of attorney in electronic contracts is not organized, that the use of electronic power of attorney is not divided based on the risk in electronic contracts, and that a common recognition between companies regarding electronic contracts and electronic signatures is not created.

As a response to this Issue, we have prepared a proposal to include specific examples of procedures for electronic signatures, electronic delegation, and electronic contracts, and to develop guidelines that can be used as a reference in selecting appropriate services that guarantee security according to the purpose.

There are various ways to develop the guidelines, such as developing the guidelines by Digital Agency and developing the guidelines in cooperation with industry groups and publishing them on the Digital Agency website. However, it is additionally stated that the method should be selected based on the advantages and disadvantages such as the points that can be done and shown in each method.

In addition, it states that by developing guidelines for fields in which transactions with high Trust are carried out, we should continue to consider the content that the spread of those fields can be expected to have a dissemination effect in other fields.

This is Issue about inappropriate agency and signing.

We have received opinions that the difference between signing by an agent and signing on behalf of an agent is not recognized, and that there are risks unique to digital in terms of password sharing, etc. in the act of signing on behalf of an electronic signature.

In terms of our response to Issue, in light of the inherent risks of digital signatures, we believe that it is necessary to reflect the aforementioned guidelines in our efforts after sorting out the differences from signatures by agents based on the actual situation of how electronic signatures by representatives are handled in Issue.

In addition, with regard to the risks unique to digital, we believe that it is necessary to disseminate the risks of sharing passwords and IC cards through efforts related to a model for internal rules, which will be explained later, and efforts to develop guidelines, which I mentioned earlier.

This is Issue about the company's internal regulations.

We have received opinions that regulations equivalent to the Seal Management Regulations for electronic signatures have not been developed and their understanding has not advanced, and that there may be obstacles to ambiguous management and digitalization of business processes such as the de facto practice of affixing seals on behalf of customers.

With regard to this, in developing the Regulations on the Handling of Electronic Signatures, which are equivalent to the Seal Management Regulations, we believe that it is necessary to create a model and guidelines that lead to the development of internal regulations and reflect them in the efforts for the guidelines mentioned earlier as necessary.

With regard to the Issue of business processes in digitalization, I believe that a certain resolution can be expected through the development of the guidelines mentioned earlier.

That is all for the Issue for the use of electronic power of attorney for electronic contracts.

At this point, I would like to return to Chairman Uehara and ask you to discuss Issue in electronic contracts.

Chairman Uehara:
If you have an opinion on the electronic contract part, please let me know by putting up the name tag in front of you, and I will appoint you.

Do you have any comments? Thank you, Imperial Household Commissioner.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
This is Miyauchi.
While various responses are written as a whole, I believe that one of the most important points is to create a model and guidelines.

There are very difficult points in the guidelines and templates. Of course, there are requests from readers to make them clear. But if you write them down too clearly, it's too blind to say, but you just copy them and do it without thinking about it.

Because there are various companies, there are also various contracts, and I think it would be a problem if they were to simply use it as it is. In particular, the different uses should not be used as written, but should be used according to the actual circumstances of each case, so I would like to include the fact that we will do these things well.

That's all for me.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Next, Mr. Itakura, I would like to ask you a favor.

Member Itakura:
I'm asking you now, and in terms of response, I think there will be a need for guidelines in Issue.

It may be a matter of how to organize them, but I think it is necessary to organize the points to be included in the Guidelines, and to conduct an additional survey of the current situation, so I think it is necessary to organize the categories a little more.

For example, when it comes to interoperability in Issue, I think there are places where we can dig a little deeper, and I think it would be good if we could continue to deal with those areas.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Is there anything else?

Mr. Kasai: Nice to meet you.

Member Kasai:
Thank you for your explanation. In my opinion, there is no particular difference.

My first question is about the development of the Guidelines on page 7. As Mr. Itakura mentioned earlier, I believe it would be better to clearly state who the Guidelines are for.

I believe that it is for the users who use electronic power of attorney and electronic signatures in general because it is for the spread of companies. On the other hand, the contract method is confidential, so it is necessary to consider very carefully what kind of meeting to ask about the actual situation.

In particular, it says that Digital Agency will cooperate with industry groups, but when I talk to platform industry groups, I can only see what I can see, or on the contrary, if I want to hear from users, it is a little difficult to do so in a public place, so I think we should carefully consider what kind of method should be used in this area.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Mr. Hamaguchi, nice to meet you.

Member Hamaguchi:
It is also on page 7.
I believe that you have been talking about the Guidelines, but in No. 3 of the response to Issue, there is a direction that it would be better to target areas where Trust conducts high transactions, such as real estate, financial institutions, large companies, and government agency. If the Guidelines were to be targeted at all B-to-B transactions, it would be very difficult to write that such services should be used for such transactions or that such electronic power of attorney should be used.

In the discussions so far, there have been opinions that electronic power of attorney is an electronic signature based on reliable identification, and that it is compatible with electronic contract services that use electronic signatures. As such, I personally think that it is good to aim for spread to other fields by developing guidelines that first target areas that require high reliability. This is exactly what is written in No. 3.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. I think I've received all of your opinions, but do you have any more?
If not, I would like to comment a little.

In the first place, I believe that the spread of electronic contracts itself is accelerating more than at one time. To tell you what I personally hear, in an industry with relatively large contracts, stamp tax has a very large incentive. I wonder if it is progressing. On the other hand, I do not know how much electronic power of attorney is used properly, but I think the current situation is that it is not included so much. So, in the first place, what is the hindrance in terms of introduction, especially in terms of ease of use and hurdles, I think it is most important to maintain it cleanly at this time.

In particular, I think there are considerable concerns about interoperability. In some cases, there may be an oligopoly in a specific service, and if there is a trouble there, there may be no escape route. Therefore, I think it would be good to discuss whether it is better to create a situation in which there is a certain discipline regarding interoperability.

Mr. Hamaguchi mentioned earlier that use cases is relatively compatible with use cases, which requires high standards for identity verification. In terms of broadening the base, I think it would be good to have a variety of types, so I would like to conclude the discussion by making a personal comment that I felt it would be good to have a slightly broader discussion.

In addition, by creating the guidelines issued by the Imperial Household Committee, depending on the way the guidelines are written, if they are used as a manual or, to put it differently, as a golden rule, a strange distortion will occur. There have been cases where a specific service is used for marketing, in which we follow the guidelines but other companies do not, so it is not effective. Therefore, if the writing style is not wide, or if a view that makes use of the interpretation that has been shaken is not issued somewhere, it is feared that it will be interpreted in a strange biased manner. Therefore, I felt that if it is issued, it is not the end, and a little follow-up is necessary.

I have just summarized it roughly, but do you have any further opinions?

Mr. Kasai, please.

Member Kasai:
Regarding the internal regulations of corporations on page 9, I believe that the development of regulations is extremely important, and because there is no such regulation, it is difficult to keep confidential information, and I think that each company is also troubled. I think it is a matter of consideration whether to add it below this, but as you have been saying, digital does not have a tactile sense, so it is very difficult to see the Issue and risks. I am also thinking about how to respond to this.

For example, if you make it a little easier to understand the point that it does not require human intervention compared to the case of receiving an analog seal, and if you express the necessity of this kind of regulation, I think there will be cases in which companies will notice it.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
I have heard that there are cases where people give passwords or cards to proxy signatures. I have heard from many people that the president does not do it while the seal is entrusted to the General Affairs Department, but what happens to electronic signatures? I think you have heard that. We may be talking about guidelines, such as sorting out what is done by a proxy based on a letter of attorney, and doing it this way will have the same effect, but I think it is necessary to guide them thoroughly and show them what is not good.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.
Certainly, there will be discussions on the extent to which proxy signatures and proxy signatures are allowed, and it may be that the guidelines will have to break this case down into smaller parts, or it may be that it is still better to leave this to the market, which is somewhat problematic.

In particular, in cloud-based contract services, authentication is a relatively easy-to-understand password, and it is relatively easy to reuse it. However, I think it is actually good to start with the protection of so-called passwords for the entire network, which is largely based on the unauthorized access Prohibition Act, which is designed to fundamentally overturn the fact that strict observance of the law leads to network order. In some cases, in the IT world, it is necessary to ask service providers to separate authentication and authorization properly in their service designs.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
That's exactly what you said. I think it is normal for the general manager of the general affairs department to hold the president's seal in the company and to press it only when the president instructs. We cannot deny this. It is not illegal or anything, and it is a seal based on the company's intention and the president's intention. I think it would be good if we could systematically do this under such control. I don't think we should ask other people to affix their signatures. I think we need to consider various ways to control this.

One possible method is remote signing, in which a key is deposited and signed based on authentication. Even if a general manager of the general affairs department other than the president says this, the server will sign, and how to control this is, of course, I think there will be various discussions. For example, who actually signed systematically in such a way, this is an internal issue, but is it based on the intention of the president? I think it is okay to consider various ways to do this. In this guideline, where to enter is another issue, and there are various ways, so I think it is good to show the direction.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.

Member Itakura:
As it has appeared in other places, in the end, I think that the target of this guideline is mainly high transactions in Trust, so I think that it is not good to have them do business only with passwords in the first place. If usability is impaired when doing security measure, it will lead to a hurdle to transition again, so I think that it is necessary to consider passwordless authentication and high-usability methods together with how much identity verification should be done.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. I would also like to add one thing. I think the biggest problem is that it is difficult to respond to the fact that authentication and authorization are different, which I mentioned a little earlier, and that the act of affixing a seal is actually being carried out in society. I don't know whether to write this in the guidelines or in an appendix to the guidelines. For example, the act of affixing a seal on behalf of another person as an actual duty is equivalent to the act of another person logging in and instructing the other person to press the seal, which is the easiest system design to understand. After that, the act of accepting a signature on behalf of another person is accepted. It is the easiest way to respond to the request, and it is the way to be understood by society. I feel that it will be easier to talk if I can organize the point that an electronic power of attorney will come into play a little more than that.

If there is a need for further explanation in the Guidelines, I think that electronic signatures used in Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act are not understood properly. If you do not understand what electronic signatures do in an easy-to-understand manner, I don't think you will be disappointed in why they are approved. Therefore, this electronic power of attorney is a story that introduces Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, so I think that something like a tutorial will be necessary in the world.

Member Kasai:
I agree with Mr. Uehara's remarks. There are only a few people I can say, but even if I talk to a variety of people, I don't get the word, or I'm in trouble. I get a lot of opinions, but to be honest, there are many people who don't know about these laws even if I say they exist.

Probably, before we get to the words such as electronic signatures, E-Certificate, and power of attorney, what happens in the case of a proxy? When we do a search like this, it is usually the website of a platformer that gets caught. Is it really enough to explain what steps there are? The government does not have a complete picture of what steps there are. If it is possible, the government can tell us that there are risks in these steps, and it is impossible to determine them, but there are cases like this, and the users will understand that there are systems. I would like to tell you that this is the actual situation.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. It is true that the information on the Internet is overwhelmingly dominated by companies that provide this type of service, and I feel that it may lead to a market reaction that we should not believe only that.

Please, Commissioner Hamaguchi.

Member Hamaguchi:
In the Guidelines, I believe that there are risks in digital procedures that must be performed in such cases, but I would like the Guidelines themselves to be positive at the end. I would like to conclude by saying that even in the field of paper transactions and transactions that have a high level of reliability, a digitalization can be made in such a way, and even in any internal process, a digitalization can be made in such a way.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. If there is nothing else, I would like to conclude by saying that we have received your opinion on the relationship between the electronic power of attorney in the electronic contract.

Then, I would like to ask for an explanation from the secretariat on the continued part.

Digital Agency Tonami:
First of all, regarding the current electronic contract, I would like to comment on the opinions received from the members.

We received many opinions on the points regarding the guidelines in 3.1 (2), but basically, at the end, Dr. Uehara and Mr. Kasai said that the word "electronic signature" is not understood in the first place, and that the usage method shown by the platformer is the first thing that users who are about to start electronic signatures and electronic contracts will see when they search. I think it is important to show them after sorting out the options first.

There have been many opinions on the Issue part arranged in the first to third meetings, but I believe it should be resolved in the end.

In addition, we received opinions on Issue regarding the agency for signing and the internal regulations of the company.

Basically, it is to avoid this risk. When you want to make a transaction with a high Trust, you should do this properly. In the first place, by presenting our internal rules, we would like to create something that can be used as a reference by business operators who have been engaged in paper transactions for electronic transition.

I have received many other opinions, but due to time constraints, I would like to ask the members to confirm them if necessary later.

That's all.

I would like to explain the Issue for the use of electronic power of attorney in online application.

Regarding the use of electronic power of attorney for Issue in online application, we have organized three online application: Issue on the spread of Issue by agents, Issue on the guidelines of online application, and Wi-Fi on the system side.

First, regarding the spread of online application by proxy, we have received opinions that Issue does not have an environment in which delegation can be easily performed digitally, that applications can be called hidden delegation or hidden proxy in the form of sharing the applicant's IC card, password, etc., and that the name recognition of the function of proxy application itself is low.

In terms of our response and approach to this Issue, the convenience of the proxy application function and the Issue of the hidden mandate are two sides of the same coin, and it is considered that the hidden mandate will be reduced by realizing a simple act of delegation in digital.

Through efforts to develop the guidelines that I will explain later, I believe that efforts should be made to promote the introduction of electronic power of attorney and proxy application functions premised on digital completion.

In addition, with regard to Issue with a hidden mandate, we believe that we should not only make efforts for convenience, but also conduct public relations activities on the risks of acts such as sharing passwords.

Regarding the Issue regarding the guidelines for proxy applications, first of all, regarding the acquisition of materials for digitalization applications, we have received opinions that there may be a lack of materials that can be used as a reference for the introduction of the proxy application function regarding the identification of the person who requests the proxy for each procedure, the proxy, the identification of the person who applies on behalf of the proxy, the link between the proxy and the proxy, and the level and method of confirmation of qualifications of the profession. As Issue regarding the organization of the level of electronic power of attorney, there are electronic power of attorney other than the specified electronic power of attorney, scanned paper power of attorney, without electronic signatures, and original power of attorney. We have received opinions that there may be no organization of in what cases the specified electronic power of attorney should be used and in what cases other electronic power of attorney may be used.

In terms of our response to this Issue, first of all, with regard to the lack of materials in Issue, we believe that we should consider developing future guidelines, etc. after understanding and organizing the actual situation by conducting a survey of the forms currently implemented and the forms in paper procedures, regarding the level and methods of identity confirmation of the mandator for each procedure, identity confirmation of the agent, the method of linking the mandator and the agent, and identity confirmation of the profession.

In the development of the Guidelines, etc., we believe that consideration should be made with the parties concerned, such as professionals who act as agents on a regular basis and public authorities and local governments who receive applications.

As for the Issue of the arrangement of the level of electronic power of attorney, we believe that it should be arranged according to the actual situation of use in the efforts to grasp the actual situation and develop guidelines, etc.

Finally, the Issue on the system side.

First, regarding the variation by system in Issue, we have received opinions that there may be problems such as the use of electronic power of attorney other than the specified electronic power of attorney in some systems and the use of different methods to confirm qualifications for each procedure. We have also received opinions that there may be variations in the status of local governments's efforts regarding Issue's electronic proxy application for the local governments system, and that there may be a lack of reference materials for the introduction of the function.

As a response to this Issue, I believe that it is necessary to develop an environment in which electronic power of attorney is used according to the level of reliability required, such as presenting standards for the security level and mechanism of electronic power of attorney in online application, and that the results of this development should be reflected in the efforts to develop the guidelines mentioned earlier.

With regard to the use of electronic power of attorney and the proxy application function in the local governments system, we believe that it is necessary to eliminate the variation among local organizations through efforts such as the development of guidelines mentioned earlier.

That's all for the Issue for the use of an electronic power of attorney in the application by a representative.

Mr. Uehara, please.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Then, regarding the Issue using the electronic power of attorney in online application, if you have an opinion, I would like you to put up a name tag as well.

Mr. Itakura, nice to meet you.

Member Itakura:
I think there are three Issue, but I think there are dependencies on the Issue itself. For example, I think that the Issue related to the spread of the No. 1 Issue is difficult to move forward unless the No. 2 guideline or the system-side environment is resolved, and in that sense, I think the No. 2 and No. 3 Prefectures are high priorities.

From other perspectives, for example, although it may be included in the Guidelines, I think it is necessary to break down the means to explain the convenience of electronic signatures, such as what they are in the first place.

In the future, we will work to eliminate the variation in Issue on the system side. I think there is also a perspective of transition from the existing system, and I feel that it is necessary to consider steps or initiatives that are easy for transition.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Do you have any opinions, other members?

Thank you, Imperial Household Commissioner.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
On page 11, it is said that it would be better to investigate the current various forms of response to Issue. In fact, in local governments, for example, when you obtain a certificate of residence, you need to affix your seal of approval to the letter of attorney.

It has always been said that it is useless to affix a seal of approval, and if you think that even if you are asked to submit a heavy-duty power of attorney, you probably will not submit it, so I think it is important to have a clear line between what will be used and where the specific electronic power of attorney will be used in Issue. The problem is that the procedures that have been relatively simple in the past are really OK, I think. We cannot make it stricter suddenly, so I think it is important to understand the actual situation to some extent and organize it.

That's all from me.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. I think there is also the issue of how much the Guidelines can limit the work of local government, but on the other hand, if local government is the field, there are quite a few cases where a little excessive confirmation is required in the actual procedures.

As for the seal that I mentioned earlier, there is also a part where they asked for a seal, so to speak, even in cases where the representative came when the person himself was next to them. I think that is a little too much, so I wonder if we will decide after looking at the actual situation a little, or conversely, if we cannot decide too much.

Is there anything else? Mr. Hamaguchi, nice to meet you.

Member Hamaguchi:
Earlier, Mr. Itakura also expressed the opinion that if there are dependencies on Issue, in particular, there are many Issue that can be resolved by presenting guidelines. As it is written on page 11 that the actual situation should be understood and organized, and that the development of guidelines and the like should be considered in the future, first of all, the actual situation must be investigated. In addition, although it is the scope of the Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Review Committee, the confirmation of qualifications for the profession described in Issue a on the same page is probably outside the scope, and it is impossible to formulate guidelines only by examining power of attorney, and it is necessary to involve other discussions, and it is necessary to make the issue of hidden mandate and the risk of password sharing known. Considering both of these situations, I think it is necessary to consider presenting partial and step-by-step measures rather than creating a single guideline and presenting it over time.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Mr. Kasai, nice to meet you.

Member Kasai:
Thank you very much. As Dr. Uehara said earlier, the actual situation of the guidelines is not that this is not good or it is not enough, but that the guidelines should be noticed by the users.

Of course, it is impossible to decide too much. For example, I learned the word "hidden mandate" for the first time here. Instead of denying that such a thing is actually happening, I thought in general that it is necessary to show that there is a level and that this level is what it is, and not to be a little more gradual or determined by this, but to be aware of it.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you. Is there anything else?

Director of Kusunoki Digital Agency:
Chairman Uehara said that there are some things that public office is too strict about. I think this is quite an important topic. It is probably the same as the wording of the contract, but the definition becomes so heavy that I get burned.

I have a feeling that it is not necessary to affix the seal if the person himself / herself is present, but it is difficult to audit or validation what the person at the counter is doing without permission without a delegated seal. If there was any internal improprieties in the past, are there organizations that add such procedures to detect them? As expected, in the world of civil laws, rules have been formed in the form of closing holes every time there is a basic problem, but in the digital world, the responsibility of system design and development providers has suddenly become heavier, and pressure is spreading to have guidelines in places where the responsibility cannot be pursued by business operators alone, and it tends to become heavier and heavier when thinking about what should be in an abstract way, so I think it is linked to the fact that it is important not to make too much decisions, as Chairman Uehara said.

From the perspective of the digitalization of the procedure, I was listening to a series of discussions while thinking that it is really difficult to obtain a certificate of the previous year's resident tax, which can be obtained in person, in My Number Card even now.

Chairman Uehara:
Generally speaking, when a new system is introduced, first of all, let's set the rules properly, and then let's operate it according to the rules. Then, because it is difficult to do it on the site, discipline will gradually come out as if something should be done about it in operation. At some stage, an accident will occur, and then it will be returned. This is a repetition of the process.

However, the digital world is closed to the system by all means. If it is a procedure to be performed by humans, we can do something about it in operation on the ground, but we cannot do it in the digital world. Therefore, if the government decides too much, it will be tied down and it will be difficult to move.

However, unlike electronic contracts, with regard to online application, as long as the government is the other party and the party concerned, it is very easy to create a rather conservative system because the public is afraid of failure. As a result, usability deteriorates and it is often not used. In order to see this balance, especially with regard to private sector, which is the country, the main user, and local governments, which is also the reader of the Guidelines, there is a way to make people aware that it is okay. I think it is exactly what Commissioner Kasai said, and I think it would be great if it could be written in a way that has a bit of breadth, or be made to encourage people to notice it.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
Just as Director Kusunoki said, I think it is difficult to determine how much confirmation will be made in local governments, but it is probably risk-based. If it is not confirmed, there will be such a risk, and there will be few people who will make such an application in spoofs. We need to make sure that this is confirmed.

On the other hand, I would like the contracts between local governments and private sector to be fairly well organized. Later, this will be a trial. After all, we need to make sure that the authenticity of the contract will be presumed in the event of a trial. It is very important to provide information that can be used by everyone in accordance with the risks. I think it is important to provide information that can be used by everyone in accordance with the balanced use of information that was mentioned in the previous guidelines.

Chairman Uehara:
Mr. Hamaguchi, please.

Member Hamaguchi:
This is something that I should mention. You said earlier that it will be more severe every time there is a burn, and it is necessary to take measures according to the risk. I think it is very important how to accept such small burns. If there is a disability in online application or some other place, or if there is an accident, it will be big news, and such small burns will not be accepted, and we will move toward a place where we will protect ourselves excessively. Personally, I think it is a huge economic loss.

I think it is a very difficult Issue in terms of how to cope with it. For the market and the people, too, excessive protection leads to huge economic losses.

In the case of life insurance, it is meaningless to insure me for, for example, 2 trillion yen, so I think it is necessary to make it known that we will take the right measures for the risk.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. If I were to say a few words about this, in order for the people to accept the risks of digital technology in general, I would say that the so-called information education needs to become more of a social education. The education curriculum says that students up to the second year of high school are supposed to have done programming at least once, but by the time these students enter the workforce, programming will have pitfalls in the blink of an eye, and the system, or computer, will be able to eliminate human error. I personally hope that if common sense, or social common sense, is established, such common sense that people who write programs have room for errors to get into the vast amount of work they do, and system problems will be caused, it will be alleviated a little, but it will take a little time. In reality, if people become familiar with information systems, it will lead to common sense that systems sometimes stop and sometimes fail.

However, there are areas where it is not acceptable in terms of social systems, such as finance and administrative procedures. I believe that there are various levels of administrative procedures, and we will do our best to ensure that irreparable things do not happen. In order to do so, it will cost a considerable amount of money, which may lead to difficulty in using it. I hope that you will understand this point.

Is there anything else?

Unless otherwise noted, we will conclude our discussion of the online application portion of the Issue Electronic Power of Attorney.

I would like to have any comments from the Secretariat on the remaining part of the agenda, and then explain the remaining part.

Digital Agency Tonami:
The Secretariat would like to comment on the current Issue of electronic power of attorney in online application.

First of all, regarding online application, in part, it is outside the definition of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, in which corporate representatives, such as corporate representatives, and sole proprietorships make a request to or delegate to someone. However, regarding the procedures to be performed by the general public, I think there is an idea that if the identity of the agent is confirmed and linked properly, it is possible to take a strict method easily because means such as My Number Card, which allows easy and strict identification and proper authentication, are widely used.

That is why the lending and borrowing of IC cards, IDs, and passwords, as in each example, is a problem, and in fact, there are specific risks, so I think we need to re-organize them.

Earlier I mentioned the procedures for the general public, but I believe that it will be necessary to sort out the procedures for business operators and corporate representatives going forward, including whether they can be done using My Number Card.

In addition, with regard to the guidelines and how to present them, I think there are various parts that can be shown and cannot be shown, but first of all, I would like to create something that will help the local local government that is in trouble, the local local government that wants to introduce the guidelines but does not know the concept, and the local region that is thought to be happy if there is a way to organize the concept, and the people who accept applications.

As an example, last fiscal year, we held a multi-stakeholder model for digital reform in Digital Agency, and in response to this recommendation, we are formulating a document called "Basic Concept on digitalization, Including Notification of Disposition," which can be used as a reference by local local government and those who make notification of disposition.

I believe that we will be able to respond to the opinions you have just given by presenting our thoughts in this way.

That's all for the comments about online application.

Then, I would like to explain about other Issue.

First, regarding Issue, which is related to the spread of electronic power of attorney, we have received opinions that there may be many systems that do not support electronic power of attorney in Issue, public and private sectors, and opinions about easy delegation. Specific electronic power of attorney is based on the strict electronic signature of the certified business operator, etc., and it was assumed that a so-called registered seal would be used, but the current situation may not cover the needs and uses for easy delegation other than this. In addition, as opinions on other use situations, we have received opinions that electronic power of attorney can be used for corporate identity verification in situations other than online application and conclusion of contracts.

Regarding our response to Issue, in terms of efforts to expand the system for responding to electronic power of attorney, we believe that it is necessary to encourage online application to respond to electronic power of attorney in parallel with efforts such as the development of guidelines for 3.1 and 3.2 Electronic Contracts and public authorities.

Regarding the needs for more easy-to-use electronic power of attorney, the online application currently used, and the use of electronic power of attorney other than electronic contracts, we believe that we should continue to investigate the use situation of users and validation users.

Regarding Issue related to certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators, we have received a digital completion that there is no mechanism to show third parties that the information of corporate representatives has been confirmed online, and the issuance of electronic power of attorney itself has not been Issue.

We will continue to consider this based on other efforts in Digital Agency.

As for the Issue regarding the subject of electronic power of attorney, as I mentioned in online application, in the definition of electronic power of attorney in the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, there is a Issue where a power of attorney in which an individual is the mandator and the requester is outside the definition.

Regarding our response to Issue, we believe that by including not only electronic power of attorney, which is defined under the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, but also power of attorney in which an individual is the mandator, in our efforts to spread electronic power of attorney, the spread of acts of delegation in the digital environment, including applications by proxy in which an individual is the mandator and acts of delegation in BtoC, will advance.

That's all for the other Issue.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. I would like to hear the explanation from the secretariat right now and any other members who have opinions on Issue regarding electronic power of attorney. What do you think?

Mr. Hamaguchi, please.

Member Hamaguchi:
Regarding B on page 13, I am afraid that we have not been able to cover the needs for various acts of delegation. For example, in response to this, it is possible to create a power of attorney that can be used for easy acts of delegation. I think it is possible to lighten the standard and consider measures to improve convenience with the current standard.

In the first place, as written here, there is a place to investigate the use situation, but I think it is necessary to investigate in what cases there is a need for easy delegation.

On page 14, the Issue for digital completion states that there is no mechanism to show information to third parties, but this is an extremely important factor. For example, it is very important for digital completion not only that the representative of the corporation is the correct representative of the corporation, but also that the information can be validation by a third party, and that the information can be validation by a third party that the information is correct at a certain point in time. Therefore, for example, it is necessary to take some measures to prove the source of the information.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Is there anything else? Imperial Household Commissioner, thank you.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
Commissioner Hamaguchi just mentioned that there is no mechanism to show it to third parties, but there are quite difficult points. For example, the Legal Affairs Bureau provides a corporate data provision system, but even if you see it, you can just download a PDF, so it is actually difficult to say that you have actually confirmed it. For example, if you attach a digital signature in some form or other method to such a place, I think it will be quite positive.

This is mostly just an aside, but the difficult thing is that the address of the representative is usually written on the certified copy of the registry, but there are cases where the address of the representative is not written. Since last September, there has been a system in place in which it is not necessary to write down the address of victims of domestic violence. In that case, there is a problem of what happens if the name of the person who is here is the same as Hiroshi Miyauchi, and how much to check is completely different depending on the application and use cases, but there are cases where it is difficult. Including this, I would like to see some kind of method developed to clearly indicate to third parties. This may go against the purpose of this conference, but I am thinking about that.

Another point is that I believe that a power of attorney in which an individual is the mandator should be used. Originally, from the perspective of the background of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, individuals may be different, but I believe that it is important to work well because it is very useful for the lives of the people by widely using it.

In the case of a warrior like me, I am entrusted by an individual to carry out various procedures and negotiations, and I sometimes receive a power of attorney and request for a lawsuit, so I think that if I can use it well, it will expand in various ways.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you. Is there anything else?

All right, Secretariat.

Counsellor Digital Agency Junpo:
I have been listening to your discussions while imagining what kind of guidelines will be created in the future from the perspective of the Secretariat. When considering electronic power of attorney, I thought that we would first consider how electronic power of attorney should be, while reflecting on whether electronic signatures are as easy as pressing a seal in our lives.

At that time, I thought that it would be necessary to devise a little bit about whether the target of the guideline would be mainly for beginners, or whether it would aim to be a tutorial, or whether it would be used to a certain extent but would be expanded a little further, or whether it would be used first by those who feel that it is difficult to use it.

In particular, with regard to the former type, which is for beginners, to be honest, I think that there is still not much awareness of the advantages or significance of using electronic power of attorney, or the risks and disadvantages of not using it, and I thought that how to organize them well is one of our important missions.

You mentioned the business process in the company, such as the stamping agency, but in a sense, it is a problem that poor internal governance is not good, or in the first place, it may be caused by a problem in the administrative proceduer. So, whether it is a Issue of the electronic power of attorney itself or a Issue of the internal governance or administrative procedure itself, I think it is the worst to sort out whether to write the guideline or not, and to burn up the procedure. So, I think we need to be prepared to a certain extent for not creating the guideline.

In addition, I think there will be a problem of how much can be covered by system design. So, if the flexibility and laziness created by human intervention can be protected by system design in a way that reduces risks to a certain extent in a standardized and unified manner, it will be easier. As Professor Miyauchi said at the end, it will be possible to use it on a personal level. In the end, electronic signatures will gradually become common, and it will be like waving a My Number Card without pressing a seal. I thought that a world will come where it will be easier for not only companies but also individuals to use electronic delegation to do business here.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you, Commissioner Itakura.

Member Itakura:
Regarding the power of attorney for an individual to be the mandator on page 15, I myself am sometimes asked for a paper power of attorney when conducting administrative procedures, and I think Dr. Miyauchi has talked about the perspective of individual delegation. How much power of attorney is required for a family member, adult guardian, or legal representative? I think it would be fine if it could be easily confirmed that the person is a family member. In the first place, I think it is necessary to sort out what purpose and what kind of action the power of attorney is required for along with the spread of the power of attorney.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. Mr. Kasai, nice to meet you.

Member Kasai:
I agree with the legal representation on page 15, but I don't have that much knowledge, but I think it is necessary to discuss this carefully because family members are the ones for whom the act of delegation is convenient and dangerous.

There may be some bad cases, but what I thought was useful is that there are many people now, and I thought it might be effective from the perspective of diversity, for example, that they can't go to the procedure or they can't really go physically.

Originally, I would like to have one delegation because the procedure is troublesome and the amount is large, but I have been thinking about whether the other is useful for cases where a corporation or an individual cannot use digital technology or cannot do such a thing for some reason, and I would like to consider this point of view in future discussions.

The other is the merit of electronic contracts and electronic power of attorney, and I wonder if it is okay to talk about stamps. I think how to express the fact that this is easier and safer will vary depending on the eternal Issue and social conditions, but I feel that it will be a problem for a long time, but I hope that it will be noticed by users even a little.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you. Is there anything else? Have a good day, Imperial Household Commissioner.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
Mr. Kasai, I have been promoting the idea of using more than just stamps. In fact, compared to using paper and stamps, the benefits of office work and document management are significant, and in fact, I feel that stamps are a minor benefit.

As Mr. Kasai said, it is very important to make this point more widely known. Among them, I would like to connect it well with the use of a letter of attorney. I hope that I can explain well about a letter of attorney that there are great advantages in the efficiency of various labors in office processing, as a result, cost reduction and speedup.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.

Director of Kusunoki Digital Agency:
I think that administrative processing is an extremely important point, especially for corporations. Currently, there are a lot of electronic contract services for observers in the field of administrative processing, and I am a little worried about this. Basically, contracts are often asymmetric. One party is in a higher position and the other party is in a weaker position. So, for people who are in a very strong position and can concentrate their contracts on the platform they use, it is very convenient because it is comprehensive. When I was a writer, each publisher had a lot of electronic contracts on different platforms. In fact, for people in a weak position, contracts cannot be managed in one place, and administrative processing is rather fragmented. When I think about achieving a platform-neutral data management system, such as electronic signatures and electronic power of attorney, I think it is necessary to think about a system that allows people in a weak position to benefit from digitalization.

In terms of the relationship with online application, the response to the digital divide has progressed in a gradual manner. As I stated in the first session, I believe that the misregistration problem between Individual Number Card Point and public fund receiving account was caused by the problem of the system itself, in which the Digital Promotion Committee members deal with the agents as if they were the individuals themselves. Therefore, I think that it is not because the system does not have the function to ensure that the agents are recorded in a manner that the agents are responsible for the actions of the agents, but it is possible that the system should be created so that the agents are recorded in the procedures in which the agents can be involved, including reflection on the series of linking problems. This is what I think. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This is what I think about. This design

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. As you said, while platformers are probably converging into several, but not one, it is an extremely serious Issue that those in a weak position may have a very hard time. For that reason, as mentioned earlier in the guidelines, if interoperability, or at least contractual or electronic power of attorney itself, is not provided at least in the export format, I don't think it will be improved, and it may be an obstacle to spread. I don't think we can force interoperability, but at least it is necessary to tell business operators that it is necessary to expand the industry as a whole.

I wonder if the accident occurred because the story of the proxy did not go well. On the other hand, acting on behalf of a person is relatively easy to accept because it is visible and has a texture. However, whether acting on behalf of a person by electronic power of attorney is really done correctly remains to the end because of the texture. Therefore, I am afraid that unless literacy is improved to a certain extent, the obstacles to acting on behalf of a person, especially lighthearted acting on behalf of a person, will not disappear. In that sense, as I have mentioned many times, I feel that the key to its spread is to convey in a way that is easy to understand what acting on behalf of a person is and what kind of technology electronic signatures are as the background technology of the screen.

That's all.

I think I have received all of your opinions, but what do you have?

Director of Kusunoki Digital Agency:
The Imperial Household Committee member is talking about corporate registration in domestic violence, and I think this is a rather hot topic. For many years, there have been requests from managers and others to remove their addresses from the registration content that can be referenced on the Internet. On the other hand, there has been a recent discussion about whether there should be a difference between paper and electronic registration.

Even in foreign countries, there are few cases in which even addresses are written, and originally, the ideal way of registry should have been revised at the time when the personal data Protection Act of 2005 was fully enforced. I heard that many of the business owners I know are renting another apartment for registration to protect their privacy. I think that the idea of privacy has stopped in Showa. For example, if you just use My Number, you can't easily find the address from there, and it is necessary to think about the ideal way of linking not only to DV victims, and in this case, public authorities can easily see the address from My Number by Juki Net, but for example, how can lawyers confirm that this person is this person face-to-face and non-face-to-face? Unless we develop it together, it is difficult to just get the address from the registry. I heard that some important questions were raised here.

Imperial Household Commissioner:
For example, if you ask "Is this correct?", you can answer. Although it is dangerous, such a protocol is possible, and I think there should be various ways.

Our business is actually a business that is quite easy to bear a grudge against, and when it comes to a legal professional corporation, the representative's address is written in the registry, so many people don't do it, which I feel is a big problem. Thank you.

Chairman Uehara:
In the first place, the E-Certificate used for electronic signatures is only to provide a signature for some personal identifier and to provide a correspondence between the public and private keys, and in that connection, some personal identifier is required.

Aside from whether or not it is written on the E-Certificate itself at that time, the fact that names and addresses are used as personal identification is a little inappropriate for the digital age. In particular, in a relatively small country like Japan, that is, a country where the risk of physical risks is quite high compared to a country with a large land area because of the movement of people, I feel that there is a Issue to provide an alternative to the disclosure of addresses while everyone is feeling the risk of disclosing addresses.

My Number is a universal My Number, and it is difficult to change it. Once it is released, it becomes a big fuss. Therefore, there is a high risk. As an intermediate one, there is a JPKI serial number, but it cannot be used as such. In the end, it may be necessary to create a system in which a different identifier, or one that can be discarded depending on the situation, or an online inquiry system, or a system in which a response is made when an inquiry is made about a certificate or a serial number attached to each certificate.

Both the electronic power of attorney and the electronic contract have been established as a system, but the missing pieces that should be solved technically as a system but could not be provided are lying around, and there is a possibility that they could be a breakthrough in terms of dissemination, but they have been overlooked until now.

If this is mentioned in the report, I feel that there will be companies that will take the next step to improve their systems.

Member Hamaguchi:
Director Kusunoki said that if we use electronic contracts, there are many cases where there is no balance, so we have no choice but to use the stronger platform. I am also in the position of providing electronic signatures, and I am trying to use AATL certificates, but I have never been able to make an electronic contract using AATL certificates. After all, please make a contract with this service from the other party. Electronic contracts and electronic signatures are made on the service and platform, and AATL certificates are used for internal procedures, and digital signatures can be made from outside the company even if you are not in the company. Regarding first thought, for example, if the signer is guaranteed freedom of choice in signing functions on various contract platforms, for example, in witness type signature services and electronic contract services, if you can choose at the end and sign and return it, I think a social system with a certain degree of equality will be created.

That's all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.

As a country, I feel that JPKI should be good in terms of interoperability.

Director of Kusunoki Digital Agency:
This is difficult, and JPKI can only have a certificate serial number at JPKI, so it is impossible to keep the signed document at hand. Including whether it is OK to leave it as it is, a legal system has been established to protect identifiers due to the trauma of the residential base, and I think it is necessary to consider various things while receiving guidance on the interoperability problem as you pointed out earlier, how to create an environment in which people with weak positions can choose, and how to respond to new demand, and what kind of technical things can be done.

In other words, under the current law, it is a knowledge that it is easier to use JPKI for identity verification and private sector's certificates for contracts when it comes to portability, but I don't think it is quite serious. In other words, if it is to be used, it is necessary to review the system so that signed documents can be kept at hand, or if it is not acceptable in terms of privacy, it is necessary to consider a good relationship with private sector.

Chairman Uehara:
I agree with that. At least in the sense of E-Certificate for signatures, there are so many private projects, so I feel that the only way to use the platform with the smallest impact on the system is to use JPKI as a platform for support of private projects or identity verification, and to use private sector's certificates. At that time, I would like to ask the people of the platform who are using witness type signatures how they will accept certificates brought in from other countries, and in terms of interoperability, could it be eased a little?

Member Itakura:
I am listening to what you are saying, and I am wondering where to start because there are a lot of organized Issue.

The point of view of this arrangement is the Issue of the spread of the use of electronic power of attorney. Among them, the current status of proxy applications and proxy signatures, the Issue of delegation by others, and the ways to handle administrative processing you mentioned earlier will be the easiest Issue solutions for users, so I thought it would be good to be able to arrange them from such a perspective.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you.
It is true that the fact that there is a considerable amount of Issue may reflect the reality that there are various factors that hinder the spread of Issue. It may be difficult to summarize this, but I would like the Secretariat to do its best.

If you do not have any other Issue, we will return it to the office.

Digital Agency Tonami:
The office would like to make a comment on Issue regarding the electronic power of attorney.

Members, I would like to have a lively discussion with the secretariat, and although there is not much to be mentioned here, I would like to comment on the interoperability of the platform.

As Director Kusunoki gave us an example, if there are really a large number of people who are using a large number of electronic contract services and are in trouble, we believe that investigating and showing the actual situation will lead to future efforts.

In addition, if this is a hindrance, it will spread by being removed, and I think it is necessary to conduct a survey to understand the current situation as a material to obtain the understanding of platformers.

There were various comments on passive initiatives based on the current situation, such as the guidelines up to now and the arrangement of the current situation.

Currently, as an initiative for platformers, I believe that we will actively return something to them. As I said earlier, we will continue to consider this matter after understanding the current situation and sorting out passive ones.

That's all for the other Issue.

In addition, I have received a note about the review meeting from Committee Member Yamaguchi, who is absent today due to personal reasons, so I will read it out.

"Thank you for clarifying the business processes in digitalization and the items related to hidden delegation that I have already pointed out. Although it is already reflected, it is redundant, but I would like to ask you again. Due to the emphasis on security, complex processes that do not match the actual situation in each digitalization will cause security risks other than password sharing, so we think that we should build a mechanism that includes the creation of guidelines, etc., after understanding the actual situation well. In addition, systems with high Trust such as real estate transactions and financial transactions are considered to be easy to use in the current system, that is, various digital transactions based on Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, so we would like you to consider using them here. On the other hand, it is expected that it is difficult to digitalization everything in electronic transactions to government agency, so we would like you to organize the survey on the actual situation in use cases."

That is all.

Chairman Uehara:
Thank you very much. You also discussed other matters related to Issue, and we also received opinions from Mr. Yamaguchi, who was absent from the meeting. In the end, if there are any opinions or omissions about the entire document, I would like to ask you again. Is there any?

Then, may I ask you one thing?

I took a quick look around, and among the several discussions you made today, you said that it is necessary to make it possible to confirm that a third party, that is, a third party, is truly based on a mandate, assuming that a simple mandate can be made. I think the biggest obstacle to this kind of administrative procedure when it is reviewed is the weight.

This is also the case with contracts, and as for applications, I think the local government side may be one of them, but the platform side is surprisingly insensitive to auditing, and there are times when they are in a hurry to ask for this information in order to conduct an audit. In order to spread it, in order to attract users, especially in terms of electronic contracts, if we do not make a mechanism so that we can receive requests for auditing from each party, we will not include as many people as possible. We will write this down somewhere well, and in particular, we will use electronic contracts themselves, but it is certain that there will be one more cushion, like electronic delegation, and we will audit whether or not it has been delegated. I think that if you put a word somewhere well, there will be one less hindrance.
Is there anything else? Here you are.

Member Kasai:
The Chairman also touched on the audit. In the first interview with the auditor, I honestly could not ask a question well in the second interview. I felt very sorry for him. After all, it was said that whether the first contract would be sufficient or not at the time of the second interview would be chicken or egg. In the end, the timing of the audit is to pull out the contract at the end, so it is easy to pull it out and check it. I think it will also lead to the efficiency of office procedures.

At the beginning of the contract, there is a stumbling block, and in a sense, at the end of the check, both of them. I totally forgot I told you about the first one, so there was no description here, so thank you for mentioning it.

Chairman Uehara:
I feel that there may be cases where people choose not to introduce electronic contracts because of audits, so I would appreciate it very much. Is that okay?

If you don't mind, I would like to return the discussion to the secretariat.

Thank you very much for your active discussion today. In fact, I received your opinions in person for the first time in the fourth session, but I think I received a great number of opinions because face-to-face discussions are more active. We will prepare a draft report based on your opinions today, but it has not been completed yet, so based on the status of the compilation, I would like to consult with the secretariat about whether to hold the fifth session, so I would like to keep it for a while this time.

I will return it to the office.

Digital Agency Tonami:
Thank you all for your active discussion. Today's minutes will be announced on the Digital Agency website after being confirmed by the members at a later date.

In addition, I will consult with the chairman and let you know whether or not the next review meeting will be held.

I would like to ask for your continued support.

This concludes the fourth meeting of the Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Status Review Committee.

Thank you very much.

End