Code of Criminal Procedure

If the public prosecutor is disclosed evidence which should be disclosed pursuant to the provisions of the preceding Article, with regard to the evidence for examination requested by the defendant or the defense counsel pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-17, paragraph (2), the public prosecutor must clearly indicate their opinion on whether said prosecutor will consent pursuant to the provisions of Article 326 or whether said prosecutor has no objection relating to the request for examination.

The court may, after hearing the opinions of the public prosecutor and the defendant or the defense counsel, set a deadline for clarification of the opinion prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

With regard to evidence other than that disclosed pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-14, paragraph (1) and Article 316-15, paragraphs (1) and (2), which is found to be relevant to allegations referred to in Article 316-17, paragraph (1), a public prosecutor must, upon request for disclosure from the defendant or the defense counsel, promptly disclose it by the means provided in Article 316-14, paragraph (1), item (i) when finding it appropriate taking into account the extent of the relevance and other necessities of disclosure for preparation of the defense of the defendant, and the content and extent of possible harmful effects of disclosure. In this case, the public prosecutor may, when finding it necessary, designate the time or means of or set a condition for the disclosure.

The defendant or the defense counsel must, when requesting disclosure under the preceding paragraph, clearly indicate the following matters:

sufficient particulars to identify the evidence requested to be disclosed;

relevance between the allegations referred to in Article 316-17, paragraph (1) and the evidence requested to be disclosed, and other reasons for which disclosure is necessary for preparation of the defense of the defendant.

When a public prosecutor finds it necessary to add or alter facts planned to be proven after the proceedings provided in Article 316-13 through the preceding Article (excluding Article 316-14, paragraph (5)) have been completed, the public prosecutor must promptly submit to the court a document describing the facts planned to be proven which are to be added or altered. In this case, the provisions of the second sentence of Article 316-13, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis.

The provisions of Article 316-13, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis, in the case of the preceding paragraph, to the facts planned to be proven which are to be added or altered under the same paragraph.

When a public prosecutor finds it necessary to add a request for examination of evidence to be used to prove facts planned to be proven, the prosecutor must promptly make a request for examination of the evidence to be added. In this case, the provisions of Article 316-13, paragraph (4) apply mutatis mutandis.

A court may, after hearing the opinions of the public prosecutor and the defendant or the defense counsel, set deadlines for the submission under the provisions of paragraph (1), the sending under the provisions of Article 316-13, paragraph (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to paragraph (2), and the request under the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

The provisions of Article 316-14, paragraph (1), Article 316-15 and Article 316-16 apply mutatis mutandis to the evidence requested to be examined by a public prosecutor pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (3).

When the defendant or the defense counsel finds it necessary to add or modify allegations referred to in Article 316-17, paragraph (1) after the proceedings provided in Articles 316-13 through 316-20 (excluding Article 316-14, paragraph (5)) have been completed, that defendant or defense counsel must promptly reveal the allegations to be added or modified to the court and the public prosecutor. In this case, the provisions of the second sentence of Article 316-13, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis.

When the defendant or the defense counsel deems it necessary to add a request for examination of evidence which will be used to prove facts planned to be proven, said person must promptly request examination of the evidence to be added. In this case, the provisions of Article 316-13, paragraph (4) apply mutatis mutandis.

The court may, upon hearing the opinions of the public prosecutor and the defendant or the defense counsel, set deadlines for clarification of the allegation prescribed in paragraph (1) and the request prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

The provisions of Articles 316-18 and 316-19 apply mutatis mutandis to the evidence which is requested for examination by the defendant or the defense counsel pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (2).

The provisions of Article 316-20 apply mutatis mutandis to the evidence which is deemed to be connected to the allegation to which an addition or alteration should be made pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1).

The provisions of Articles 299-2 and 299-3 apply mutatis mutandis when a public prosecutor or a defense counsel discloses evidence pursuant to the provisions of this Division.

The provisions of Article 299-4 apply mutatis mutandis when a public prosecutor is to disclose evidence pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-14, paragraph (1) (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-21, paragraph (5)).

The provisions of Articles 299-5 through 299-7 apply mutatis mutandis when a public prosecutor has taken measures pursuant to the provisions of Article 299-4, paragraphs (1) through (10) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph.

In concluding the pretrial arrangement proceeding, the court must confirm the results of the arrangement of issues and evidence of the case with the public prosecutor and the defendant or the defense counsel.

When a court finds it necessary taking into account the extent of the necessity of disclosure of evidence, the content and extent of the possible harmful effects of disclosure and other circumstances, the court may render a ruling to designate the time or means of or set a condition for the disclosure of the evidence to be disclosed pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-14, paragraph (1) (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-21, paragraph (5)) upon request from a public prosecutor, or the evidence to be disclosed pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-18 (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-22, paragraph (4)) upon request from the defendant or the defense counsel.

If the court makes a ruling for the request prescribed in the preceding paragraph, it must hear the opinion of the opponent.

An immediate appeal against the ruling prescribed in paragraph (1) may be filed.

When a court finds that a public prosecutor has not disclosed the evidence to be disclosed pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-14, paragraph (1) or Article 316-15, paragraph (1) or (2) (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-21, paragraph (5)) or Article 316-20, paragraph (1) (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-22, paragraph (5)), or the defendant or the defense counsel has not disclosed the evidence to be disclosed pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-18 (including cases when these provisions are applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 316-22, paragraph (4)), the court must, upon request from the opponent, render a ruling to order the disclosure of that evidence. In this case, the court may designate the time or means of or set a condition for the disclosure.

If the court makes a ruling for the request prescribed in the preceding paragraph, it must hear the opinion of the opponent.

An immediate appeal against the ruling prescribed in paragraph (1) may be filed.

If the court deems it necessary in making a ruling for the request prescribed in Article 316-25, paragraph (1) or paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, it may order the public prosecutor, the defendant or the defense counsel to present the evidence which is requested. In this case, if all or part of the evidence is an electronic or magnetic record, the court is to receive the presentation of that electronic or magnetic record by inspecting a display of its content or viewing and listening to a reproduction of its content.

If the court deems it necessary in making a ruling for the request made by the defendant or the defense counsel prescribed in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, it may order the public prosecutor to present a list of the evidence that said prosecutor holds which falls within the range specified by the court. In this case, if the public prosecutor has prepared the list as an electronic or magnetic record, the court is to receive the presentation of the list by inspecting a display of its content.

In the cases of the preceding two paragraphs, the court may not let anyone inspect or copy the evidence referred to in paragraph (1) or the list referred to in the preceding paragraph.

The provisions of paragraph (1) and the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis to the court where the immediate appeal prescribed in the provisions of Article 316-25, paragraph (3) or paragraph (3) of the preceding Article is pending and the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs apply mutatis mutandis to the court where the immediate appeal prescribed in the provisions of paragraph (3) of the same Article is pending.

When a court finds it necessary during the course of the proceedings, the court may, upon request from a public prosecutor, the defendant or the defense counsel, or ex officio, render a ruling to order that the case be subject to an inter-trial arrangement proceeding as trial preparation for arrangement of the issues and evidence of the case after the first trial date.

The provisions of the preceding Subsection (excluding the provisions of Article 316-2, paragraph (1) and Article 316-9, paragraph (3)) apply mutatis mutandis to the inter-trial arrangement proceeding. In this case, the evidence that the public prosecutor, the defendant or the defense counsel requested to be examined before the ruling prescribed in the preceding paragraph is deemed to be the evidence that was requested to be examined in the inter-trial arrangement proceeding and the words "the date of the pretrial arrangement proceeding" prescribed in Articles 316-6 to 316-10 and Article 316-12, paragraphs (1) and (2) are deemed to be "the date of the inter-trial arrangement proceeding" and the words "the records of the pretrial arrangement proceeding" prescribed in paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the same Article are deemed to be "the records of the inter-trial arrangement proceeding."

When a case has been placed into a pretrial arrangement proceeding or an inter-trial arrangement proceeding, the court may not be convened without the presence of the defense counsel even if it is not the case prescribed in Article 289, paragraph (1).

With regard to a case which has been placed in a pretrial arrangement proceeding, when the defendant or the defense counsel has facts which must be proved by evidence or any other factual or legal allegations, said person must clearly reveal them after the proceeding prescribed in Article 296. In this case, the provisions of the proviso of the same Article apply mutatis mutandis.

With regard to a case which has been placed in a pretrial arrangement proceeding, the court must, pursuant to the Rules of Court, reveal the results of the proceeding on the trial date after the proceeding prescribed in the preceding Article.

With regard to a case which has been placed in an inter-trial arrangement proceeding, the court must, pursuant to the Rules of Court, reveal the results of the proceeding on the trial date after the proceeding.

With regard to a case which has been placed in a pretrial arrangement proceeding or an inter-trial arrangement proceeding, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 298, paragraph (1), the public prosecutor and the defendant or the defense counsel may not request examination of evidence after the end of the pretrial arrangement proceeding or the inter-trial arrangement proceeding, except evidence that was not able to be requested in the proceeding because of unavoidable reasons.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph do not prevent the court from examining evidence ex officio when the court deems it to be necessary.