When the ruling prescribed in paragraph (3) of the preceding Article is given, the court in charge of the appeal must appoint an attendant who is an attorney-at-law, if the juvenile does not have an attendant who is an attorney-at-law.
For the case prescribed in Article 22-3, paragraph (2) (limited to the case for which the family court conducted the measures prescribed in Article 17, paragraph (1), item (ii)), the court in charge of the appeal may appoint an attendant who is an attorney-at-law, if the juvenile does not have an attendant who is an attorney-at-law, and if the court finds that an attendant who is an attorney-at-law, needs to attend the proceedings of second instance, taking into consideration the nature of the case, presence or absence of the parent or guardian and other circumstances.
抗告裁判所は、第二十二条の三第二項に規定する事件（家庭裁判所において第十七条第一項第二号の措置がとられたものに限る。）について、少年に弁護士である付添人がなく、かつ、事案の内容、保護者の有無その他の事情を考慮し、抗告審の審理に弁護士である付添人が関与する必要があると認めるときは、弁護士である付添人を付することができる。