Image credit: Shutterstock
“Saint Seiya” creator Masami Kurumada and three companies he heads have sued his former manager and related parties for about ¥2.89 billion, or $19.6 million, alleging years of unauthorized transfers and diverted licensing revenue.
The September 2 lawsuit in Tokyo District Court follows allegations that about ¥4.68 billion left the companies between 2018 and 2024. The plaintiffs are seeking roughly ¥2.89 billion after earlier repayments and recoveries.
Company Funds Were Allegedly Diverted for Six Years
The former manager also served as an executive and oversaw accounting and external negotiations for Kurumada’s companies, including copyright management firm Kurumada Production.
The plaintiffs allege he transferred company funds without authorization into accounts belonging to companies he controlled. Business partners were also allegedly instructed to send licensing payments to separate entities instead of Kurumada’s companies.
The alleged activity continued for about six years before irregularities surfaced around February 2024 following questions from the Tokyo Regional Taxation Bureau. Kurumada’s legal team says the former manager acknowledged moving company money without authorization but maintained that he acted with Kurumada’s interests in mind.
Some Disputed Funds Were Allegedly Invested in Crypto
Kurumada’s representatives said part of the disputed money was used for cryptocurrency investments. Publicly reported lawsuit materials do not identify the digital assets involved, the exchanges or wallets used, or how much of the alleged ¥4.68 billion was invested in crypto.
It is also unclear whether those investments remain recoverable or produced gains or losses. The crypto activity concerns the alleged use of diverted company funds rather than a claim against a crypto exchange, issuer or protocol.
Kurumada Companies Seek About ¥2.89B in Tokyo Court
The plaintiffs are seeking approximately ¥2.89 billion from the former manager and related parties after earlier recoveries. The Tokyo District Court has not ruled on the allegations.
Publicly available materials do not disclose how much of the disputed money was placed into cryptocurrency or whether any crypto-linked assets remain available for recovery.
