Can a sugar daddy in Japan get a refund after a breakup?

Bengo4 is a Japanese legal advice website that asks the questions we want answered.

It has now ventured into the murky world of compensated dating, specifically sugar dating (known as papakatsu in Japan). In an article written in consultation with a genuine attorney at law, it asks if a man in his sixties who spent ¥10 million on a woman in her twenties can reasonably expect a refund after a breakup.

The situation is based on fact: a married man in his sixties reached out to the website after splashing out around ¥10 million over five years on a woman in her twenties with whom he was romantically involved.

He began dating her when she was still a student, providing financial support for her living expenses and tuition. However, their relationship subsequently deteriorated, leading to a breakup, at which point the man demanded his money back.

The woman refused, arguing that the funds constituted an “illegal cause performance,” and that she was therefore under no obligation to return them. While the man studiously kept a diary documenting the amounts given and their conversations at the time, there is no formal loan agreement. He also admits that the money was intended at the time as a gift (and for which the woman, ahem, repaid him with her company and, no doubt, intimacy).

Is it possible to recover ¥10 million that was voluntarily “given” once a relationship has ended? Why does providing financial support to an extramarital partner fall under the category of “performance for an illegal cause,” effectively barring any claim for its return?

According to analysis by the attorney Kimitoshi Takemura, the core issue is whether the ¥10 million was a loan or gift.

Article 549 of the Civil Code stipulates that a “gift” is established when one party expresses an intention to transfer property to another without compensation, and the other party accepts it.

In this case, the man himself stated that he “intended it as a gift” at the time. There is no loan agreement, nor is there any evidence of agreed-upon repayment deadlines or methods. Consequently, the money provided for living expenses and tuition is highly likely to be classified as a gift rather than a loan.

While a gift not documented in writing can, in principle, be rescinded, this does not apply to portions of the gift that have already been given. This makes it generally difficult to demand the return of money already handed over to a woman simply on the grounds that the relationship has ended or that the giver now regrets the gift. Article 550 of the Civil Code stipulates that a gift cannot be rescinded once the act of giving is complete.

Another issue that arises is the concept of performance for an illegal cause, which refers to the transfer of money or property for a purpose that is either prohibited by law or deemed socially improper. Article 708 of the Civil Code stipulates that, as a general rule, a person who transfers property for an “illegal cause” cannot demand its return.

For example, if a married person provides money or property to a romantic partner to sustain an extramarital affair, such a transfer might be classified as performance for an illegal cause, depending on the specific purpose and circumstances. As such, there is no legal recourse for someone in recovering property they voluntarily transferred for an illegal or improper purpose.

However, not every transfer of money from a married person to a romantic partner constitutes performance for an illegal cause. Whether it qualifies depends on the specific circumstances, such as the intended purpose of the transfer and the extent to which it was linked to the romantic relationship.

In the case of the ¥10 million, because the funds were provided for purposes such as living expenses or tuition, the entire amount may not necessarily constitute performance for an illegal cause.

Nevertheless, even so, if the transfer is deemed a gift (meaning there was no original agreement for the money to be repaid), it is generally be difficult to demand its return.

In other words, good luck trying to get that money back from that much-younger lady!