Code of Civil Procedure

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 219, documentary evidence may be offered by petitioning the court to request the person in possession of the document to send the document; provided, however, that this does not apply if a party may request the issuance of an authenticated copy or transcript of the document pursuant to law or regulation.

If the court finds it necessary, it may retain a document submitted or sent to it.

The provisions of Article 132-13 do not apply to the document that was submitted or sent.

A document must be proven to be of authentic provenance.

If a document is found, in light of its form and purport, to have been prepared by a public officer in the course of duties, it is presumed to be an official document of authentic provenance.

If there is any doubt about the authenticity of an official document's provenance, the court may inquire of that government agency or public office sua sponte.

If a private document has been signed by, or bears the seal of, the principal or an agent, it is presumed to be of authentic provenance.

The provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) apply mutatis mutandis to a document that is found to have been prepared by a foreign government agency or public office.

The authenticity or inauthenticity of a document's provenance may be proven by a comparison of handwriting or seal impressions.

The provisions of Article 219; Article 223; Article 224, paragraphs (1) and (2); Article 226; and Article 227, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to the submission or sending of a document or any other object that contains the handwriting or seal impression to be used for comparison.

If there is no sample of the adverse party's handwriting which is suitable for comparison, the court may order the adverse party to write graphic symbols to be used for comparison.

If the adverse party fails to comply with a ruling as referred to in the provisions of the preceding paragraph without a legitimate reason for failing to do so, the court may find the allegations of the party that offers evidence concerning the authenticity or inauthenticity of the document's provenance to be true. The same applies if the adverse party writes the graphic symbols in a style of handwriting that is different from the adverse party's own.

If a third party fails to comply with a ruling to submit under the provisions of Article 223, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to paragraph (2) without a legitimate reason for failing to do so, the court issues a ruling sentencing the third party to a civil fine of not more than 100,000 yen.

An immediate appeal may be filed against a ruling as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

If a party or their agent, intentionally or through gross negligence, has diverged from the truth in challenging the authenticity of a document's provenance, the court issues a ruling sentencing that person to a civil fine of not more than 100,000 yen.

An immediate appeal may be filed against a ruling as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

In a case as referred to in paragraph (1), if the party or agent that challenges the authenticity of a document's provenance admits, while litigation is pending, that the document is of authentic provenance the court may set aside the ruling referred to in that paragraph, depending on the circumstances.

The provisions of this Section apply mutatis mutandis to drawings, photographs, audiotapes, videotapes, and any other objects prepared for the purpose of indicating information, other than documents.

A person must file a request for the court to examine evidence in connection with the content of information recorded in an electronic or magnetic record while either submitting the electronic or magnetic record or petitioning the court to order the person with the authority to use that electronic or magnetic record to submit it.

As provided for by the Rules of the Supreme Court, a person must submit an electronic or magnetic record under the provisions of the preceding paragraph by submitting a recording medium on which the electronic or magnetic record has been recorded or by using an electronic data processing system as specified by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

The provisions of Articles 220 through 228 (excluding paragraph (4) of that Article) and Article 230 apply mutatis mutandis to the examination of evidence under paragraph (1) of the preceding Article. In such a case, the phrase "the person in possession of a document" in Article 220, Article 221, paragraph (1), item (iii), Article 222, Article 223, paragraph (1) and paragraphs (4) through (6) and Article 226 is deemed to be replaced with "the person with the authority to use an electronic or magnetic record"; the phrase "personally in possession of a document" in Article 220, item (i) is deemed to be replaced with "personally authorized to use an electronic or magnetic record"; the term "deliver" in item (ii) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "provide"; the phrase "a document held by the State or a local public entity" in item (iv)(d) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "an electronic or magnetic record that the State or a local public entity is authorized to use"; the terms "documents" and "a document" in (e) of that item are deemed to be replaced with "electronic or magnetic records" and "an electronic or magnetic record recorded in a recording medium", respectively; the phrase "order to submit documents" in Article 221 (including the title), Article 222, the title of Article 223, Article 223, paragraphs (1), (3), (6) and (7), the title of Article 224, Article 224, paragraph (1), the title of Article 225 and Article 225, paragraph (1) is deemed to be replaced with "order to submit electronic or magnetic records"; the phrase "the content of that document" in Article 224, paragraphs (1) and (3) is deemed to be replaced with "the content of information recorded in the electronic or magnetic records"; the phrase "Article 219" in Article 226 is deemed to be replaced with "Article 231-2, paragraph (1)"; the phrase "the issuance of an authenticated copy or transcript of the document" in the proviso to that Article is to be deemed to be replaced with "the issuance of a document certifying the full particulars of information recorded in the electronic or magnetic record or the provisions of an electronic or magnetic record certifying the full particulars of the information"; the term "a document" in Article 227 is deemed to be replaced with "a recording medium storing electronic or magnetic record"; the phrase "an official document of authentic provenance" in Article 228, paragraph (2) is deemed to be replaced with "of authentic provenance"; and the term "an official document" in paragraph (3) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "an electronic or magnetic record to be created by a public office or public officer".

As provided for by the Rules of the Supreme Court, a person is to submit an electronic or magnetic record subject to an order under Article 223, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph or to transmit electronic or magnetic records subject to a request under Article 226 as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph by submitting or sending a recording medium on which the electronic or magnetic record has been stored or by using an electronic data processing system as specified by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

The provisions of Articles 219, 223, 224, 226, and 227, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to the presentation or sending of an object for inspection.

If a third party fails to comply with an order to submit under the provisions of Article 223, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph without a legitimate reason for failing to do so, the court issues a ruling sentencing the third party to a civil fine of not more than 200,000 yen.

An immediate appeal may be filed against a ruling as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

If neither party objects and the court finds it to be appropriate, the court may inspect evidence using a means that enables it to gain an awareness of the state of the thing being inspected through audio and visual transmissions, as provided by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

If the court or an authorized or commissioned judge finds that it will be necessary in the inspection of evidence, the court or judge may order expert testimony.

If the court finds circumstances to be such that, unless the examination of evidence is conducted in advance, it will be difficult to use the evidence, the court, upon petition, may conduct an examination of the evidence under the provisions of this Chapter.

A petition for the preservation of evidence that is filed after the filing of an action, must be filed with the court of the instance in which the evidence is to be used; provided, however, that during the time from after the first date for oral arguments has been designated or from after the case is referred to preparatory proceedings or written preparatory proceedings until oral arguments are concluded, such a petition must be filed with the court in charge of the case.

A petition for the preservation of evidence that is filed before the filing of an action, must be filed with the district court or summary court that has jurisdiction over the residence of the person to be examined, person in possession of the document in question, or person with the authority to use the electronic or magnetic records or the location of the object to be inspected.

If there are pressing circumstances, a petition for the preservation of evidence may be filed with the district court or summary court referred to in the preceding paragraph, even after the filing of an action.

A petition for the preservation of evidence may be filed even if the adverse party cannot be designated. In such a case, the court may appoint a special representative on behalf of the person that would be the adverse party.

If the court finds it to be necessary, while litigation is pending, it may issue a ruling to preserve evidence sua sponte.

No appeal may be entered against a ruling to preserve evidence.

In a case as referred to in the proviso to Article 235, paragraph (1), the court may have an authorized judge examine evidence.

The petitioner and the adverse party must be summoned to appear on a date for examination of evidence; provided, however, that this does not apply in a case requiring urgency.

Expenses for the preservation of evidence constitute part of the court costs.

If a party has requested that a witness who was examined during proceedings for the preservation of evidence be examined during oral arguments, the court must examine the witness.