這起案件發生在日本山梨縣河口湖畔，牽涉到中國籍飯店經營者郭亞川（53歲，日文名秋山雅治）。郭某因涉嫌指使人員在未經地主同意的情況下，砍伐遮擋富士山景觀的樹木，而被日本警方逮捕並起訴。此案引發日本當地社會的關注，因為富士山作為日本的象徵之一，其周邊景觀的保護向來十分嚴格，任何涉及破壞景觀或違法行為的事件，往往會受到嚴厲檢視。

郭亞川所經營的「雲上富士酒店」於2020年在河口湖畔開業。然而在兩年後，飯店附近的一些樹木因為遮擋從酒店客房遠眺富士山的視野，在沒有獲得地主的許可下遭到砍伐。這一行為被揭發後，警方調查發現幕後主使正是郭亞川本人。對於飯店業者來說，能夠直接看到富士山的景觀無疑是極具吸引力的賣點，因此外界普遍認為，他之所以鋌而走險，是希望改善飯店的競爭力。

案件在8月8日於甲府地方法院首次開庭審理。郭亞川身穿黑色西裝出庭，當庭承認了全部指控，並表示自己願意承擔責任。他在法庭上低頭認罪，稱「我一時衝動，判斷失誤，這件事我全部負責。」庭審中，他與坐在證人席上的妻子對視，並點頭示意。郭的妻子作證時表示，因為新冠疫情爆發後，飯店生意急劇下滑，收入減少，丈夫因經營困境承受巨大壓力，才會在情急之下做出錯誤決定。

辯護律師在法庭上替郭求情，強調他並非出於惡意，而是受到現實經營壓力所迫。律師表示：「疫情讓他的事業陷入低潮，他感到無助，才做出了這樣的錯誤選擇。」辯護方因此請求法院能夠判處緩刑或以罰金替代監禁，並認為此案仍有一定的「同情餘地」。

在庭審過程中，郭亞川還提及自己的家庭狀況。他表示今年女兒正準備報考日本的大學，而自己與家人多年來一直希望能夠取得日本國籍，因此格外擔心這起案件會影響到入籍的可能性。他懇求法院能從輕量刑，希望能有改過的機會。

然而，檢方則對此持嚴厲態度，認為郭的行為已經明確破壞當地景觀及土地所有者的權益，必須給予足夠的刑罰以示警戒。檢方因此向法院請求判處郭一年有期徒刑。

此案的社會爭議點在於：一方面，郭亞川確實在經營困境中出現壓力，並表達出悔意與家庭責任感；但另一方面，他的行為已觸及日本社會對自然景觀與土地權益的敏感界線，特別是涉及富士山這樣的國民象徵，使輿論普遍傾向嚴懲。最終結果將取決於法院如何在「情有可原」與「違法嚴重性」之間取得平衡。

This case took place by Lake Kawaguchi in Yamanashi Prefecture, Japan, and involves a Chinese hotel operator named Guo Yachuan (53, also known by his Japanese name Masaharu Akiyama). Guo was arrested and indicted by Japanese authorities for allegedly ordering the felling of several trees that were blocking the hotel’s view of Mount Fuji, all without the landowner’s permission. The case has drawn public attention in Japan, since Mount Fuji is regarded as a national symbol, and the protection of its surrounding landscape is strictly enforced. Any act that damages the scenery or violates land rights tends to be scrutinized very seriously.

Guo’s hotel, Unjō Fuji Hotel, opened in 2020 along the shores of Lake Kawaguchi. Two years later, several trees near the property that blocked the panoramic view of Mount Fuji were cut down without authorization. Investigations revealed that Guo was the one behind the incident. For a hotel, having an unobstructed view of Mount Fuji is a highly attractive selling point, so many observers believe he took this risk in hopes of making the business more competitive.

The first hearing was held on August 8 at the Kofu District Court. Dressed in a black suit, Guo admitted to all charges and expressed his willingness to take full responsibility. In court, he bowed his head and said: “I was impulsive, I made a misjudgment, and I take full responsibility.” During the proceedings, he exchanged glances and a nod with his wife, who was seated in the witness stand. She testified that the hotel’s business had suffered badly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, income had dropped significantly, and her husband had been under enormous stress from running the hotel, which led him to make the wrong decision.

Guo’s defense attorney pleaded for leniency, arguing that his actions were not malicious but rather a desperate mistake under business pressure. “The pandemic pushed his business into decline, he felt helpless, and that’s why he made this wrong choice,” the lawyer explained. The defense requested a suspended sentence or a fine instead of imprisonment, emphasizing that there was still “room for sympathy” in this case.

In his own statement, Guo also mentioned his family circumstances. He said that his daughter is preparing for university entrance exams in Japan this year, and that his family has long hoped to obtain Japanese citizenship. He expressed concern that this case might jeopardize their application for naturalization and pleaded with the court to hand down a lighter sentence so that he could make amends.

The prosecution, however, took a firm stance. They argued that Guo’s actions had clearly harmed the local environment and violated the property rights of the landowners. Given the symbolic significance of Mount Fuji, they maintained that a strict penalty was necessary to serve as a deterrent. The prosecution requested a one-year prison sentence.

The controversy surrounding this case lies in the balance between two factors: on one hand, Guo did act out of desperation under financial hardship and showed remorse; on the other hand, his actions crossed a serious line in Japanese society, where both property rights and natural scenery — especially involving a cultural icon like Mount Fuji — are highly valued. Public opinion in Japan largely favors punishment, but the court’s final ruling will ultimately weigh Guo’s remorse and circumstances against the severity of his offense.