五菱会ヤミ金融事件は，犯罪被害財産の取り戻しに関する立法の不備を露呈した。被害者らは民事訴訟を提起し，刑事訴訟において犯罪被害財産の没収の可否をめぐる争点が浮き彫りにされた。この事件がきっかけで，民事手続による回復の被害回復給付金支給手続が創設され，海外流出した犯罪被害財産を取り戻す最初の適用例を生んだ。また，国会はヤミ金融対策法に「元本返済不要」と定めるかどうかについて判断を回避したが，最高裁は「ヤミ金融に対しては一切の債務がない」とする判例を確立し，これによって，警察官の現場対応のあり方が変更された。民事訴訟は，統治機構内部の対立を経由して政策形成を促すこともある。The Goryo-kai loan-shark case revealed the deficiency of the legislation in recovering the property of crime victims. The victims in this case submitted a civil action. The issue of the right or wrong of the confiscation of the property of crime victims was highlighted in the investigation of criminal procedures. This case was an opportunity: procedures for payment based on the recovery of the property of crime victims were founded and a precedent was set for the regaining of property of crime victims which had begun to be dispersed abroad. The Diet had sidestepped the issue of whether or not it was necessary to return the principal, but the Supreme Court established the precedent that "no debts shall be incurred through loan sharking". Police procedures for investigating loan shark cases were thus affected and changed. Moreover, such civil actions may promote better policy-making when there is internal dissension in the organs of state power.
