Juveniles Act

In addition to what is provided for in this Act, juvenile criminal cases are governed by the same rules as regular criminal cases.

If a judicial police officer, as a result of the investigation of a suspected juvenile case, deems that there is a suspicion of a crime punishable by a fine or less, they must refer the case to a family court. This also applies if a judicial police officer deems that there are grounds for referring the case to a family court for trial and decision, even if there is no suspicion of a crime having been committed.

If a public prosecutor, as a result of the investigation of a suspected juvenile case, deems that there is a suspicion of a crime, they must refer the case to a family court, except in the case prescribed in the main clause of Article 45, item (v). The same applies if a public prosecutor deems that there are grounds for referring the case to a family court for trial and decision, even if there is no suspicion of a crime having been committed.

In the case of the preceding paragraph, the appointment of a defense counsel for the suspect by a judge, based on the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, becomes ineffective.

A public prosecutor, in a suspected juvenile case, may file a request for the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), with a judge, in lieu of a request for detention; provided, however, that the request for measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (i) must be filed with a judge of the family court.

Upon receipt of the request prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the judge also has the authority that the family court does for the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1).

In a suspected juvenile case, the public prosecutor may not file a request for detention with a judge, unless it is unavoidable.

When a judge conducts the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (i) based on the request pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, the public prosecutor must immediately file a request to revoke the measures with a judge, if the prosecutor investigates and decides not to refer the case to a family court.

When conducting the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (ii) upon request pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, the judge must issue a warrant to do this.

The measures prescribed in the preceding paragraph remains in effect for ten days from the date on which the request is filed.

The following provisions apply when a family court refers a case to a public prosecutor, pursuant to the provisions of Article 20, paragraph (1):

unless the juvenile is referred to a family court again, the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (i) becomes ineffective if no prosecution is instituted within ten days of the referral of the case to the public prosecutor. If the prosecution is instituted, the court, by its own authority or by request from a public prosecutor, may revoke the measures at any time;

if a detention warrant is issued in the course of the measure prescribed in the preceding item, the measure becomes ineffective by this;

the measure prescribed in item (i) remains effective after the juvenile reaches 20 years of age;

the measure prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (ii) is deemed as detention conducted by a judge, and its period begins from the day of referral to a public prosecutor. In this case, this period may not be extended if a detention warrant has already been issued for the case;

if the public prosecutor deems that there is enough suspicion of a crime to institute a prosecution for a case referred to them by a family court, they must institute a prosecution; provided, however, that this does not apply where suspicion of a crime is not sufficient enough to institute a prosecution in part of the referred case, or a new fact that can affect the circumstances of the crime etc. is found, so that prosecution is considered inappropriate. This also applies to when prosecution is considered inappropriate due to the circumstances after the referral;

the attendant who is an attorney-at-law appointed pursuant to the provisions of Article 10, paragraph (1) is deemed to be the defense counsel;

if the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (ii) are deemed as detention, conducted by a judge pursuant to the provisions of item (iv), a detention warrant is deemed as having been issued and the provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure for appointment of a defense counsel for the suspect by a judge apply to the case.

The provisions of items (i) through (iv), and (vii) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis to when a family court refers the case to a public prosecutor pursuant to the provisions in Article 19, paragraph (2) or in Article 23 paragraph (3).

If a family court makes the ruling prescribed in Article 23, paragraph (2), or in Article 24, paragraph (1), regarding a case in which a judge assigns a defense counsel, in advance, for the suspect, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning the bearing of court costs apply mutatis mutandis. In this case, the term "render a sentence" in Article 181, paragraphs (1) and (2) in that Code is replaced by "give a ruling on disposition for rehabilitation of an adjudicated delinquent".

In a case in which a family court decides to order the juvenile to bear the court costs, a public prosecutor may inspect and copy the records and evidence of the case to the extent that is necessary to enforce the court decision, as prescribed by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

If a disposition for rehabilitation of an adjudicated delinquent, as prescribed in Article 24, paragraph (1), has been made against a juvenile who has committed a crime, the case for which a trial and decision have been concluded may not be criminally prosecuted or be subjected to a trial and decision in a family court.

If a ruling referred to in Article 22-2, paragraph (1) has been given to a case, and the ruling not to subject a juvenile to disposition for rehabilitation of an adjudicated delinquent becomes final and binding on the case on which the ruling referred to in that paragraph has been given, on the ground that there are no grounds to subject the juvenile to a trial and decision, or that it is not necessary to subject the juvenile to the disposition for rehabilitation of an adjudicated delinquent, the provisions of the preceding paragraph apply.

The provisions of paragraph (1) do not apply to the case in which a ruling to revoke a disposition for rehabilitation of an adjudicated delinquent pursuant to the provisions of Article 27-2, paragraph (1) has become final and binding; provided, however, that this does not apply to the case, if a ruling as prescribed in Article 22-2, paragraph (1) that is to be governed by the provisions of Article 27-2, paragraph (6) is given, and the disposition is revoked on the grounds that there is no reason to subject a juvenile to a trial and decision.