Early reporting on the Uduzu incident described the victim as having “illegally departed” rather than being abducted by North Korea.
Such coverage may have delayed public recognition of the abduction issue in Japan.
This article examines the emergence of the term “abduction” in Japanese media and the impact of early misreporting.

Astonishingly, the Asahi article was written in a way that piled further pressure on Mr. Kume as an “illegal departure case.”
2018-01-31.
The following is a continuation of the previous section.
The reason the Uduzu incident of more than two years earlier was re-investigated and published again was to reinforce the argument that North Korea could abduct Japanese nationals and to support the claim that the motive behind the abduction of the three couples was the acquisition of family registry documents.
Though not mentioned in the Asahi’s “illegal departure” article, what R had Mr. Kume prepare in advance and bring to North Korea were only two copies of family registry extracts.
“Abduction” appears in a headline for the first time.
Astonishingly, the Asahi article was written as if to deliver another blow to Mr. Kume as an “illegal departure case.”
“Even in the heat of summer he wore nothing but long-sleeved shirts, reportedly because he was concerned about tattoos on his body.”
To me, this reads as if he departed illegally because he was such a person, yet the Asahi Shimbun considers this article its first report of abduction suspicion.
If it were an abduction abroad, the crime of kidnapping for the purpose of transport overseas (Penal Code Article 226) would apply.
In the end, prosecutors refrained from indicting on abduction charges, and the Asahi reported it as “illegal departure,” while the Sankei reported it as abduction.
The headline of the top social affairs article dated January 9, 1980, read as follows.
“A similar case two and a half years earlier. Security guard abducted abroad. Purpose was to obtain family registry. Arrested foreign spy confesses.”
At the start of 1980, it was reported prominently for three consecutive days.
Abduction is a form of kidnapping that deprives an individual of freedom and takes them to another place, but it was not a word commonly used in daily life.
I myself do not recall ever using it before, but in the first day’s article I wrote “attempted abduction” regarding the Toyama incident, and on the third day, regarding the Uduzu incident, I wrote: “As an abduction case from Japan to a foreign country, the Kim Dae-jung incident of seven years earlier comes to mind. However, there has officially been no case of a Japanese national being abducted abroad, before or after the war.”
Thus, “abduction” appeared in a newspaper headline for the first time.
I believe there was an intention to distinguish it from ordinary kidnapping cases, but I do not clearly remember, even as the writer.
At that time, the character for “ra” in abduction was not part of the official common-use kanji, so it was printed as “ra-chi” with kana.
It was added to the common-use kanji list in 2010.