Code of Criminal Procedure

The court of second instance shall examine matters covered in the statement of the reasons for appeal.

The court of second instance may conduct examinations ex officio with regard to the items set forth in the provisions of Article 377 through Article 382 and Article 383, even when these are not covered in the statement of the reasons for appeal to the court of second instance.

The court of second instance may conduct an examination of the facts upon the request of the public prosecutor, the defendant, or his/her defense counsel or may do so ex officio when it is necessary for the examination set forth in the preceding article; provided, however, that the court of second instance shall examine the facts of which the public prosecutor, the defendant, or his/her defense counsel has made prima facie showing under Article 382-2 only when this is indispensable to proving that the sentence is unreasonable or that there was an error in the finding of facts that would have affected the judgment.

When the court of second instance deems necessary, it may, ex officio, conduct an examination of any circumstances which occurred after a judgment in the first instance and which would have affected sentencing.

The examination prescribed in the two preceding paragraphs may be carried out by a member of a judicial panel, or may be delegated to a judge of a district court, family court, or summary court. In this case, the commissioned or delegated judge shall have the same authority as a court or a presiding judge.

When the examination prescribed in paragraph (1) or (2) has been carried out, the public prosecutor and defense counsel may give their arguments based on the results.

Evidence which was allowed in the first instance may be entered as evidence in the second instance as well.

When an appeal to the court of second instance violates the form prescribed by laws and regulations, or it was made after expiration of the right to appeal, the court shall dismiss said appeal by a judgment.

When there are no grounds as in the items set forth in the provisions of Article 377 through Article 382 and Article 383, the court shall dismiss said appeal by a judgment.

When there are grounds as in the items set forth in the provisions of Article 377 through Article 382 and Article 383, the court shall, on a judgment, reverse the judgment made by the court of first instance.

As a result of the examination pursuant to the paragraph (2) of Article 393, the court of second instance may, on a judgment, reverse the judgment made by the court of first instance when it deems that not doing so would clearly be contrary to justice.

When the court of second instance reverses the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that it unlawfully found lack of jurisdiction or dismissed prosecution, a judgment shall be rendered to remand the case to the court of first instance.

When the court of second instance reverses the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that it unlawfully found jurisdiction, the case shall, on a judgment, be transferred to the court of first instance that has jurisdiction thereover; provided, however, that the court of second instance shall conduct the trial as the court of first instance when said court has jurisdiction over said case as the court of first instance.

When the court of second instance reverses the judgment of the court of first instance on grounds other than those set forth in the preceding two articles, a judgment shall be rendered to remand the case to the court of first instance, or to transfer the case to a court which is equal to the court of first instance; provided, however, that the court of second instance may render an additional judgment on the case when it finds it possible to do so based on the case records and the evidence examined by the court of first and second instances.

When the court of second instance reverses the judgment of the court of first instance in favor of the defendant and the grounds therefor are common to a codefendant who appealed, the court shall also reverse said judgment in favor of said codefendant.

With regard to a case for which an appeal has been filed by the defendant or for the defendant, the court shall not render a heavier sentence than that rendered by the court of first instance.

When a defendant who has been indicted for a crime punishable by imprisonment or a heavier sentence and who has been granted bail or suspension of execution of detention does not appear on the trial date on which the judgment is to be pronounced, the court of second instance may not pronounce any judgment other than the following judgments; provided, however, that this does not apply in the case prescribed in the proviso to Article 390-2 when it finds that there is no risk of difficulty arising in confining that person for the execution of the sentence.

A judgment dismissing an appeal against the original judgment that rendered acquittal, dismissal by a bar to prosecution, exculpation, dismissal of prosecution or jurisdictional incompetence;

A judgment remanding the case to the ruling court or transferring it to the competent court of jurisdiction;

A judgment rendering acquittal, dismissal by a bar to prosecution, exculpation or dismissal of prosecution.

The same as the main clause of the preceding paragraph also applies when a defendant who has been indicted for a crime punishable by imprisonment or a heavier sentence and whose bail or suspension of execution of detention has been rescinded is not detained; provided, however, that this does not apply when it finds, in a case where it is expected to be difficult to detain the defendant because the defendant has fled, that it is necessary to promptly pronounce any of the following judgments.

A judgment finding guilty (excluding a rendition of exculpation; the same applies hereinafter in this item) in a criminal case prescribed in Article 253-2, paragraph (1) of the Public Offices Election Act (Act No. 100 of 1950), or a judgment dismissing an appeal against the original judgment that found guilty;

A judgment rendering confiscation of crime victim property under Article 13, paragraph (3) of the Organized Crime Punishment Act or collection of the value of crime victim property under Article 16, paragraph (2) of the Organized Crime Punishment Act, or a judgment dismissing an appeal against the original judgment that rendered either of these.

When the court of first instance has unlawfully failed to make a ruling of dismissal of prosecution, the court shall, on a ruling, dismiss prosecution.

The provisions of paragraph (2) of Article 385 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the ruling prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

An appeal against a judgment rendered in expedited trial proceedings may not be filed on the grounds that there are grounds as prescribed in Article 382 with regard to the facts constituting the crime indicated in the rendered judgment, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 384.

The court of second instance may not reverse a judgment rendered in expedited trial proceedings on the grounds that there are grounds as prescribed in Article 382 with regard to the facts constituting the crime indicated in the rendered judgment, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of Article 397.

When a notification of any of the following judicial decisions has been made with regard to a defendant who has received pronouncement of a judgment sentencing the defendant to imprisonment or a heavier sentence, Article 342-2 does not apply to that defendant:

A judgment reversing the original judgment that sentenced to imprisonment or a heavier sentence;

A ruling dismissing prosecution in the case charged to the court relating to the original judgment that sentenced to imprisonment or a heavier sentence.

When the pronouncement of the judgment set out in item (i) of the preceding paragraph has been made (excluding the case where a judicial decision prescribed in Article 345 has further been rendered pursuant to the proviso to Article 400), the detention warrant pertaining to the ruling under Article 342-8, paragraph (1) (limited to the portion pertaining to item (i), and including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 404) loses its effect.

When an appeal against a judgment sentencing to imprisonment or a heavier sentence has been dismissed, the permission under Article 342-2 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 404) loses its effect.

When a notification of any of the following judicial decisions has been made, the ruling under Article 345-2 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to the following Article; the same applies hereinafter in this paragraph) loses its effect:

A judgment reversing the original judgment of a fine pertaining to the ruling under Article 345-2;

A ruling dismissing prosecution in the case charged to the court relating to the original judgment of a fine pertaining to the ruling under Article 345-2.

When the pronouncement of the judgment set out in item (i) of the preceding paragraph has been made (excluding the case where a judicial decision prescribed in Article 345 has further been rendered pursuant to the proviso to Article 400), the detention warrant pertaining to the ruling under Article 342-8, paragraph (1) (limited to the portion pertaining to item (i)) as applied mutatis mutandis with replacement of terms pursuant to Article 345-3 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to the following Article) loses its effect.

Except as otherwise provided in this Code, the provisions in Part II pertaining to public trials shall apply mutatis mutandis to the trial of second instance.