Goto Main Content
:::

Chapter Law Content

Chapter III Juvenile Protection
Section III Interlocutory Appeal and Trial de Novo
Article 61
A juvenile, his/her statutory agent, a person who currently protects the juvenile or his/her assistant may file an interlocutory appeal if he/she disagrees with a ruling made by the juvenile court in the following categories; where an interlocutory appeal is to be filed by the assistant, the decision of whether to file the appeal may not contradict the express intent of the party who appointed the assistant:
1. a ruling that sends a juvenile to a juvenile investigation officer for consulting in accordance with Article 26, Subparagraph 1;
2. a ruling that orders a juvenile to be sent to a juvenile detention center or a ruling that denies the application of release to the custody of another party in accordance with Article 26, Subparagraph 2;
3. a ruling that extends the period of detention or denies the application to revoke the ruling ordering the detention in accordance with Article 26-2, Paragraph 1;
4. a ruling made in accordance with Article 27, Paragraph 1 or Paragraph 2;
5. a ruling made in accordance with Article 29, Paragraphs 1;
6. a ruling made in accordance with Article 40;
7. a disposition made in accordance with Article 42;
8. a ruling that orders detention for observation made in accordance with Article 55, Paragraph 3 or Article 55-3, and a ruling that revokes the probation so as to sends the juvenile to a corrective education in accordance with Article 55, Paragraph 4;
9. a ruling that extends the duration of placement counseling made in accordance with Article 55-2, Paragraph 3, or a disposition that revokes the placement counseling so as to sends the juvenile to a corrective education in accordance with Article 55-2, Paragraph 5;
10. a ruling that revokes the application for waiving or suspending the execution of corrective education in accordance with Article 56, Paragraph 1;
11. a disposition that orders the continuation of the execution of corrective education in accordance with Article 56, Paragraph 4;
12. a ruling that orders the bearing of education cost in accordance with Article 60.
Article 62
A victim or his/her statutory agent of a juvenile case may file an interlocutory appeal against a ruling made by the juvenile court in the following categories:
1. a ruling not to submit a matter to hearing in accordance with Article 28, Paragraph 1;
2. a ruling not to submit a matter to hearing but to order transferred guidance, give reprimand, or strict discipline in accordance with Article 29, Paragraph 1;
3. a ruling not to apply protective measures in accordance with Article 41, Paragraph 1;
4. a ruling that orders protective measures in accordance with Article 42, Paragraph 1.
Where the victim is deceased or cannot file an interlocutory appeal for other reasons, his/her spouse, direct blood relatives, collateral relatives within the third degree of relationship, relatives by marriage within the second degree of relationship, family head or family members may file an interlocutory appeal in his/her place.
Article 63
The competent court for hearing an interlocutory appeal is the superior court of the juvenile court.
No interlocutory appeal may be filed against a ruling by the court hearing the interlocutory appeal.
Article 64
The period for filing an interlocutory appeal is ten (10) days from the service of ruling; however, an interlocutory appeal is also effective if made after the pronouncement but before the service of the ruling.
Provisions between Articles 407 to 414 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in Section I of this Chapter shall apply mutatis mutandis to an interlocutory appeal filed in accordance with provisions in this section.
Article 64-1
After a disposition that pronounces protective measures is finalized and it is deemed that the protective measures concerned should not apply for any of the following reasons, a juvenile protection officer, the juvenile, his/her statutory agent, a person who currently protects the juvenile or his/her assistant may apply to the juvenile court that pronounced the protective measures for a trial de novo:
1. where the application of the law is clearly mistaken and the error is sufficiently significant to affect the ruling;
2. where newly established evidence is sufficient to show that the protective measures should not apply to the juvenile in question;
3. where circumstance for retrial in accordance with Article 420, Paragraph 1, Subparagraphs 1, 2, 4, or 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applies.
Provisions in Article 423, Article 429, the first part of Article 430, Articles 431 to 434, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 435, and Article 436 shall apply mutatis mutandis to procedures of trial de novo in the foregoing paragraph.
Where the juvenile court which pronounced the protective measures finds one of the circumstances in the subparagraphs of Paragraph 1, it may deliver a ruling of trial de novo on its own initiative.
Where after the completion of the execution of protective measures, a finding is made to subject the juvenile to criminal prosecution due to the results of a trial de novo, the ensuing disadvantage shall apply to the juvenile, and a ruling of transferring the said juvenile to a prosecutor of the prosecutors’ office in the competent court shall not be made.
Article 64-2
Where after a ruling not to apply protective measures is finalized one of the following circumstances appears so that it is deemed that the protective measures should have been pronounced, the victim or the juvenile’s statutory agent may apply to the court that made the ruling not to apply protective measures for a trial de novo:
1. where circumstances for retrial in accordance with Article 422, Subparagraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure exist;
2. where a confession made by the juvenile or newly discovered evidence is sufficient to show the existence of behavior specified in Article 3, Paragraph 1, which leads to the conclusion that the protective measures should have be pronounced.
Provisions in Articles 429, 431 to 434, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 435, and Article 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to trial de novo in the foregoing paragraph.
Where the juvenile court that delivered a ruling not to apply protective measures finds one of the circumstances specified in Paragraph 1 above, it may make a ruling of trial de novo on its own initiative.
A trail de novo in accordance with Paragraph 1 or with the foregoing paragraph may not be initiated one (1) year after the finalization of a ruling not to apply protective measures.