第七十一条裁判所は、被告人を同じくする数個の対象事件の弁論を併合した場合又は第四条第一項の決定に係る事件と対象事件の弁論を併合した場合において、併合した事件（以下「併合事件」という。）を一括して審判することにより要すると見込まれる審判の期間その他の裁判員の負担に関する事情を考慮し、その円滑な選任又は職務の遂行を確保するため特に必要があると認められるときは、検察官、被告人若しくは弁護人の請求により又は職権で、併合事件の一部を一又は二以上の被告事件ごとに区分し、この区分した一又は二以上の被告事件ごとに、順次、審理する旨の決定（以下「区分審理決定」という。）をすることができる。ただし、犯罪の証明に支障を生ずるおそれがあるとき、被告人の防御に不利益を生ずるおそれがあるときその他相当でないと認められるときは、この限りでない。

Article 71(1)Where a court finds it particularly necessary, in cases that a court has consolidated proceedings for more than one Subject Cases for which the accused is the same or proceedings for cases pertaining to the ruling under Article 4, paragraph (1) and for the Subject Case, by taking into consideration the period the trial proceedings are expected to require and other circumstances relating to the burden of the saiban-in as a result of trying consolidated cases (hereinafter referred to as "Consolidated Cases") together, in order to ensure the smooth appointment of or execution of the duties by saiban-in, the court may, at the request of the public prosecutor, the accused or their defense counsel or ex officio, render a ruling that divides a part of the Consolidated Cases into one or more cases under public prosecution and that tries the divided one or more cases under public prosecution in sequence (hereinafter referred to as a "Ruling of Divisional Proceedings"); provided, however, that the foregoing provisions do not apply where proof of offenses could be interfered with, where the defense of the accused could be harmed, or where it is otherwise found to be inappropriate.

２区分審理決定又は前項の請求を却下する決定をするには、最高裁判所規則で定めるところにより、あらかじめ、検察官及び被告人又は弁護人の意見を聴かなければならない。

(2)In order that a court renders a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings or a ruling that dismisses the request of the preceding paragraph, the court must hear the opinion of the public prosecutor and the accused or their defense counsel in advance as provided for in the Rules of the Supreme Court.

３区分審理決定又は第一項の請求を却下する決定に対しては、即時抗告をすることができる。

(3)An immediate appeal may be filed against a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings or a ruling that dismisses the request of paragraph (1).

第七十二条裁判所は、被告人の主張、審理の状況その他の事情を考慮して、区分事件（区分審理決定により区分して審理することとされた一又は二以上の被告事件をいう。以下同じ。）ごとに審理することが適当でないと認めるときは、検察官、被告人若しくは弁護人の請求により又は職権で、区分審理決定を取り消す決定をすることができる。ただし、区分事件につき部分判決がされた後は、この限りでない。

Article 72(1)Where a court finds it not suitable, by taking into consideration the assertion of the accused, status of proceedings and other circumstances, to try divisional cases (meaning one or more cases under public prosecution which are made by a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings to be tried divisionally; the same applies hereinafter) individually, the court may, at the request of the public prosecutor, the accused or their defense counsel or ex officio, render a ruling to revoke the Ruling of Divisional Proceedings; provided, however, that the foregoing provisions do not apply after a partial judgment is rendered for the divisional cases.

２裁判所は、被告人の主張、審理の状況その他の事情を考慮して、適当と認めるときは、検察官、被告人若しくは弁護人の請求により又は職権で、区分審理決定を変更する決定をすることができる。この場合においては、前条第一項ただし書の規定を準用する。

(2)Where a court finds it suitable, by taking into consideration the assertion of the accused, status of proceedings and other circumstances, the court may, at the request of the public prosecutor, the accused or their defense counsel or ex officio, render a ruling to change a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings.In this case, the provisions of the proviso under paragraph (1) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis.

３前二項の決定又はこれらの項の請求を却下する決定をするには、最高裁判所規則で定めるところにより、あらかじめ、検察官及び被告人又は弁護人の意見を聴かなければならない。

(3)In order that a court renders a ruling under the preceding two paragraphs or a ruling to dismiss the request under these paragraphs, the court must hear the opinion of the public prosecutor and the accused or their defense counsel in advance as provided for in the Rules of the Supreme Court.

４前条第三項の規定は、前項に規定する決定について準用する。

(4)The provisions of paragraph (3) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis to the ruling set forth in the preceding paragraph.

第七十三条裁判所は、二以上の区分事件があるときは、決定で、区分事件を審理する順序を定めなければならない。

Article 73(1)Where more than one divisional cases are pending, the court must determine the order to try the divisional cases by a ruling.

２裁判所は、被告人の主張、審理の状況その他の事情を考慮して、適当と認めるときは、決定で、前項の決定を変更することができる。

(2)Where a court finds it suitable, by taking into consideration the assertion of the accused, status of proceedings or other circumstances, the court may change the ruling under the preceding paragraph by a ruling.

３前二項の決定をするには、最高裁判所規則で定めるところにより、あらかじめ、検察官及び被告人又は弁護人の意見を聴かなければならない。

(3)In order for a court to render a ruling under the preceding two paragraphs, the court must hear the opinion of the public prosecutor and the accused or their defense counsel in advance as provided for in the Rules of the Supreme Court.

第七十四条裁判所は、区分事件に含まれる被告事件の全部が、対象事件に該当しないとき又は刑事訴訟法第三百十二条の規定により罰条が撤回若しくは変更されたため対象事件に該当しなくなったときは、構成裁判官のみで構成する合議体でその区分事件の審理及び裁判を行う旨の決定をすることができる。

Article 74When none of the cases under public prosecution included in divisional cases do not fall under the Subject Cases, or said cases are no longer Subject Cases because the applicable penal statute has been revoked or altered pursuant to the provisions of Article 312 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a court may render a ruling that the proceedings and judicial decisions for the divisional cases are tried by a panel constituting only of Member Judges.

第七十五条区分審理決定並びに第七十二条第一項及び第二項、第七十三条第一項及び第二項並びに前条の決定は、公判前整理手続及び期日間整理手続において行うことができる。第七十一条第一項並びに第七十二条第一項及び第二項の請求を却下する決定についても、同様とする。

Article 75A Ruling of Divisional Proceedings and rulings under Article 72, paragraphs (1) and (2), Article 73, paragraphs (1) and (2) and the preceding Article may be rendered in the pretrial conference procedure and the inter-trial conference procedure. The same applies to a ruling to dismiss the request under Article 71, paragraph (1) and Article 72, paragraphs (1) and (2).

第七十六条裁判所は、区分審理決定をした場合において、第二十六条第一項に規定する必要な員数の補充裁判員を置く決定又は補充裁判員を置かない決定をするときは、各区分事件の審理及び裁判（以下「区分事件審判」という。）並びに第八十六条第一項に規定する併合事件審判について、それぞれ、これをしなければならない。

Article 76Where a court renders a ruling to arrange the necessary number of alternate saiban-in or to arrange no alternate saiban-in, as set forth in Article 26, paragraph (1), in cases that the court has rendered a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings, the court must render such ruling on proceedings and judicial decisions of divisional cases (hereinafter referred to as the "Trials on Divisional Cases") and on the Trials on Consolidated Cases set forth in Article 86, paragraph (1) respectively.

第七十七条区分事件の審理において、証拠調べが終わった後、検察官は、次条第二項第一号及び第三号から第五号まで並びに第三項各号に掲げる事項に係る事実及び法律の適用について意見を陳述しなければならない。

Article 77(1)In the proceedings for divisional cases, the public prosecutor must, after the examination of evidence, state its opinion on facts and application of laws pertaining to the items listed in paragraph (2), item (i) and items (iii) to (v) of the following Article and in each item of paragraph (3).

２区分事件の審理において、証拠調べが終わった後、被告人及び弁護人は、当該区分事件について意見を陳述することができる。

(2)In the proceedings for divisional cases, the accused and their defense counsel may state their opinions on the divisional cases after examination of the evidence.

３区分事件の審理において、裁判所は、区分事件に含まれる被告事件に係る被害者参加人（刑事訴訟法第三百十六条の三十三第三項に規定する被害者参加人をいう。第八十九条第一項において同じ。）又はその委託を受けた弁護士から、第一項に規定する事項に係る事実又は法律の適用について意見を陳述することの申出がある場合において、審理の状況、申出をした者の数その他の事情を考慮し、相当と認めるときは、公判期日において、同項の規定による検察官の意見の陳述の後に、訴因として特定された事実の範囲内で、申出をした者がその意見を陳述することを許すものとする。

(3)In the proceedings for divisional cases, a court is to, if a request has been made by participating victims pertaining to the case under public prosecution included in divisional cases (meaning participating victims set forth in Article 316-33, paragraph (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; the same applies in Article 89, paragraph (1)) or attorney at law appointed by them to state opinions on facts or application of laws pertaining to items set forth in paragraph (1), permit persons who have made such request within the scope of the facts identified as counts on the trial date after the statement of opinion by the public prosecutor pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) in case that the court finds it appropriate by taking into consideration the status of proceedings, number of persons having made requests and other circumstances.

４刑事訴訟法第三百十六条の三十八第二項から第四項までの規定は、前項の規定による意見の陳述について準用する。

(4)The provisions of Article 316-38, paragraphs (2) to (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure apply mutatis mutandis to the statement of opinions pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

５刑事訴訟法第三百十六条の三十七の規定は、第三項の規定による意見の陳述をするための被告人に対する質問について準用する。

(5)The provisions of Article 316-37 of the Code of Criminal Procedure apply mutatis mutandis to questions asked to the accused in order to state opinions as set forth in paragraph (3).

第七十八条区分事件に含まれる被告事件について、犯罪の証明があったときは、刑事訴訟法第三百三十三条及び第三百三十四条の規定にかかわらず、部分判決で有罪の言渡しをしなければならない。

Article 78(1)Where a case under public prosecution included in the divisional cases has been proven to be an offence, the court must pronounce conviction by a partial judgment notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 333 and 334 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

２部分判決で有罪の言渡しをするには、刑事訴訟法第三百三十五条第一項の規定にかかわらず、次に掲げる事項を示さなければならない。

(2)In order that a court pronounces a conviction by a partial judgment, the court must signify items listed in the following notwithstanding the provisions of Article 335, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure:

３部分判決で有罪の言渡しをする場合は、次に掲げる事項を示すことができる。

(3)Where a court pronounces conviction in a partial judgment, the court may state items listed in the following:

４区分事件の審理において第二項第四号又は第五号に規定する事実が主張されたときは、刑事訴訟法第三百三十五条第二項の規定にかかわらず、部分判決において、これに対する判断を示さなければならない。

(4)Where the facts set forth in paragraph (2), item (iv) or (v) are asserted in the proceedings of divisional cases, a court must state the decision on the facts in the partial judgment notwithstanding the provisions of Article 335, paragraph (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

５第六十三条の規定は、第一項の規定による部分判決の宣告をする場合について準用する。

(5)The provisions of Article 63 apply mutatis mutandis to the pronouncement of the partial judgment pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1).

第七十九条区分事件に含まれる被告事件について、刑事訴訟法第三百二十九条の規定による管轄違いの判決、同法第三百三十六条の規定による無罪の判決、同法第三百三十七条の規定による免訴の判決又は同法第三百三十八条の規定による公訴棄却の判決の言渡しをしなければならない事由があるときは、部分判決でその旨の言渡しをしなければならない。

Article 79Where a court has grounds requiring it to render, with respect to a case under public prosecution included in divisional cases, a judgment of lack of jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of Article 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a judgment of acquittal pursuant to the provisions of Article 336 of the Code, a dismissal for judicial bar pursuant to the provisions of Article 337 of the Code or a dismissal of public prosecution pursuant to the provisions of Article 338 of the Code, the court must render such judgment by partial judgment.

第八十条部分判決に対しては、刑事訴訟法第三百七十二条の規定にかかわらず、控訴をすることができない。

Article 80No appeal to the court of second instance may be filed against a partial judgment notwithstanding the provisions of Article 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

第八十一条第七十九条の部分判決は、当該部分判決をした事件に係る弁論を刑事訴訟法第三百十三条第一項の決定により分離した場合には、その決定を告知した時に、終局の判決となるものとする。

Article 81The partial judgment under Article 79 is to, when proceedings pertaining to the case for which the partial judgment has been rendered are divided by the ruling under Article 313, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, become the final judgment at the time the ruling is announced.

第八十二条区分事件審判に関する公判調書は、刑事訴訟法第四十八条第三項の規定にかかわらず、各公判期日後速やかに、遅くとも当該区分事件についての部分判決を宣告するまでにこれを整理しなければならない。ただし、部分判決を宣告する公判期日の調書及び公判期日から部分判決を宣告する日までの期間が十日に満たない場合における当該公判期日の調書は、それぞれその公判期日後十日以内に、整理すれば足りる。

Article 82(1)The trial record for the Trials on Divisional Cases must be organized promptly after each trial date or no later than the partial judgment for the divisional case is pronounced notwithstanding the provisions of Article 48, paragraph (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; provided, however, that with respect to the record for the trial date on which the partial judgment is pronounced and for the trial date if the period from the trial date to the day on which the partial judgment is pronounced is shorter than ten days, it would be sufficient if the record is organized within ten days after the respective trial dates.

２前項の公判調書に係る刑事訴訟法第五十一条第一項の規定による異議の申立ては、同条第二項の規定にかかわらず、遅くとも当該区分事件審判における最終の公判期日後十四日以内（前項ただし書の規定により部分判決を宣告する公判期日後に整理された調書については、整理ができた日から十四日以内）にこれをしなければならない。

(2)The filing of an objection pursuant to the provisions of Article 51, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the trial record under the preceding paragraph must be made, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of said Article, at the latest, within fourteen days after the last trial date for the Trial on Divisional Case (or, in case of the trial record which is organized, pursuant to the provisions of the proviso of the preceding paragraph, after the trial date on which the partial judgment has been pronounced, within fourteen days after the day on which the organization is completed).

第八十三条区分事件に含まれる被告事件についての公訴は、刑事訴訟法第二百五十七条の規定にかかわらず、当該区分事件について部分判決の宣告があった後は、これを取り消すことができない。

Article 83(1)The prosecution for the case under public prosecution included in divisional cases may not be withdrawn after the partial judgment is pronounced for the divisional case notwithstanding the provisions of Article 257 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

２刑事訴訟法第四百六十五条第一項の規定による正式裁判の請求があった被告事件について、区分審理決定があったときは、同法第四百六十六条の規定にかかわらず、当該被告事件を含む区分事件について部分判決の宣告があった後は、当該請求を取り下げることができない。

(2)When a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings is rendered on a case under public prosecution for which a request for a formal trial pursuant to the provisions of Article 465, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is made, the request may not be withdrawn after the partial judgment is pronounced for the divisional cases that include the case under public prosecution notwithstanding the provisions of Article 466 of the Code.

３前項の区分審理決定があった場合には、同項の請求に係る略式命令は、刑事訴訟法第四百六十九条の規定にかかわらず、当該被告事件について終局の判決があったときに、その効力を失う。

(3)When the Ruling of Divisional Proceedings under the preceding paragraph is rendered, the summary order pertaining to the request under said paragraph loses its effect, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, at the time the final judgment on the case under public prosecution is pronounced.

第八十四条区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員及び補充裁判員の任務は、第四十八条の規定にかかわらず、次の各号のいずれかに該当するときに終了する。

Article 84The duties of saiban-in and alternate saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases terminate notwithstanding the provisions of Article 48 when either of the following items becomes applicable:

第八十五条前条の規定により区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員の任務が終了し、新たに第二条第一項の合議体に他の区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員が加わった場合には、第六十一条第一項の規定にかかわらず、公判手続の更新は行わないものとする。

Article 85Where the duties of the saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases have terminated pursuant to the provisions of the preceding Article and new saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to other Trial on Divisional Cases have been added to the panel under Article 2, paragraph (1), the trial procedures are not to be renewed notwithstanding the provisions of Article 61, paragraph (1).

第八十六条裁判所は、すべての区分事件審判が終わった後、区分事件以外の被告事件の審理及び区分事件の審理（当該区分事件に含まれる被告事件に係る部分判決で示された事項に係るもの（第三項の決定があった場合を除く。）を除く。）並びに併合事件の全体についての裁判（以下「併合事件審判」という。）をしなければならない。

Article 86(1)After all of the Trials on Divisional Cases are concluded, a court must conduct proceedings for cases under public prosecution other than divisional cases and proceedings for divisional cases (excluding those pertaining to items signified by the partial judgment that relates to cases under public prosecution included in said divisional case (excluding cases in which a ruling under paragraph (3) has been rendered)) and must render judicial decisions for entire consolidated cases (hereinafter referred to as the "Trials on Consolidated Cases").

２裁判所は、前項の規定により併合事件の全体についての裁判をする場合においては、部分判決がされた被告事件に係る当該部分判決で示された事項については、次項の決定があった場合を除き、これによるものとする。

(2)Where a court renders a judicial decision on entire consolidated cases pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the court is to be subject to items signified by the partial judgment that relates to cases under public prosecution for which said partial judgment has been rendered, except for cases where a ruling under the next paragraph has been rendered.

３裁判所は、構成裁判官の合議により、区分事件の審理又は部分判決について刑事訴訟法第三百七十七条各号、第三百七十八条各号又は第三百八十三条各号に掲げる事由があると認めるときは、職権で、その旨の決定をしなければならない。

(3)Where a court finds, through consultation of Member Judges, that grounds which are listed in each item of Article 377, each item of Article 378 or each item of Article 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure exist in the proceedings of divisional cases or the partial judgment, the court must render a ruling as such ex officio.

第八十七条第八十四条の規定により区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員の任務が終了し、新たに第二条第一項の合議体に併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員が加わった場合には、第六十一条第一項の規定にかかわらず、併合事件審判をするのに必要な範囲で、区分事件の公判手続を更新しなければならない。

Article 87Where the duties of saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases have terminated pursuant to the provisions of Article 84 and new saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to a Trial on Consolidated Cases have been added to the panel under Article 2, paragraph (1), the trial procedures of said divisional cases must be renewed to the extent necessary to conduct the Trial on Consolidated Cases notwithstanding the provisions of Article 61, paragraph (1).

第八十八条区分事件に含まれる被告事件についての刑事訴訟法第二百九十二条の二第一項の規定による意見の陳述又は同条第七項の規定による意見を記載した書面の提出は、併合事件審判における審理において行うものとする。ただし、併合事件審判における審理において行うことが困難である場合その他当該被告事件を含む区分事件の審理において行うことが相当と認めるときは、当該区分事件の審理において行うことができる。

Article 88The statement of opinion pursuant to the provisions of Article 292-2, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cases under public prosecution included in divisional cases or the submission of documents in which an opinion is indicated pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (7) of said Article is to be made in the proceedings of the Trials on Consolidated Cases; provided, however, that, when it is difficult to state an opinion or submit documents in the proceedings of the Trials on Consolidated Cases or it is otherwise found appropriate to state an opinion or submit documents in the proceedings of the trial on divisional cases including a case under public prosecution, a statement or submission may be made in the proceedings of said divisional case.

第八十九条併合事件審判における審理において行う刑事訴訟法第二百九十三条第一項の規定による検察官の意見の陳述、同条第二項の規定による被告人及び弁護人の意見の陳述並びに同法第三百十六条の三十八第一項の規定による区分事件に含まれる被告事件に係る被害者参加人又はその委託を受けた弁護士の意見の陳述は、部分判決で示された事項については、することができない。

Article 89(1)The statement of opinion by the public prosecutor pursuant to the provisions of Article 293, paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the statement of opinion by the accused and their defense counsel pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (2) of said Article and the statement of opinion by participating victims or attorneys at law appointed by them pertaining to cases under public prosecution included in divisional cases pursuant to the provisions of Article 316-38, paragraph (1) of the Code, which are made in the proceedings for the Trials on Consolidated Cases, may not be made on items signified by the partial judgment.

２裁判長は、前項に規定する意見の陳述が部分判決で示された事項にわたるときは、これを制限することができる。

(2)Where the statement of opinion set forth in the preceding paragraph overlaps with the items signified by the partial judgment, the presiding judge may limit it.

第九十条裁判所は、区分審理決定をした場合において、必要があると認めるときは、裁判員等選任手続において、第八十四条の規定により区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員の任務が終了した後に他の区分事件審判又は併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任されるべき必要な員数の選任予定裁判員を、各区分事件審判又は併合事件審判ごとに、あらかじめ選定することができる。この場合において、選任予定裁判員の員数は、裁判所が定めるものとする。

Article 90(1)Where a court finds it necessary in cases that it has rendered a Ruling of Divisional Proceedings, the court may select the necessary number of prospective saiban-in who are to be appointed as saiban-in or alternate saiban-in to carry out duties pertaining to other Trials on Divisional Cases or Trials on Consolidated Cases after the duties of saiban-in or alternate saiban-in who have carried out duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases has terminated pursuant to the provisions of Article 84 in the Saiban-in, etc. Appointing Procedure for the respective Trials on Divisional Cases or Trials on Consolidated Cases in advance.In this case, the number of prospective saiban-in is to be determined by the court.

２前項の規定により選任予定裁判員を選定する場合における第二十六条第二項、第二十七条第一項ただし書、第三十五条第二項及び第三十六条第二項の規定の適用については、第二十六条第二項中「前項の決定をした」とあるのは「選任予定裁判員を選定することとした」と、第二十七条第一項ただし書中「期日から」とあるのは「期日及び第九十七条第一項の規定により選任予定裁判員を裁判員に選任する決定がされると見込まれる日から」と、第三十五条第二項中「第三十七条第一項又は第二項の規定により裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任する」とあるのは「第九十一条第一項の規定により選任予定裁判員に選定する」と、第三十六条第二項中「補充裁判員を置く」とあるのは「裁判員の員数を超える員数の選任予定裁判員を選定する」と、「選任すべき補充裁判員の」とあるのは「選定すべき選任予定裁判員の員数のうち裁判員の員数を超える」と、「三人又は四人のときは二人、五人又は六人のときは三人」とあるのは「三人以上の奇数及びそれに続く偶数の員数のときは当該偶数の員数の二分の一の員数」とする。

(2)With respect to the application of the provisions of Article 26, paragraph (2), the proviso of Article 27, paragraph (1), Article 35, paragraph (2) and Article 36, paragraph (2) when the prospective saiban-in are selected pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the term "renders the ruling under the preceding paragraph" under Article 26, paragraph (2) is deemed to be replaced with "determines to select the prospective saiban-in", the term "from the date" under the proviso of Article 27, paragraph (1) with "from the date and the day on which a ruling to appoint the prospective saiban-in as saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of Article 97, paragraph (1) is expected to be rendered", the term " appoints the saiban-in candidate as a saiban-in or alternate saiban-in is rendered pursuant to the provisions of Article 37, paragraph (1) or (2)" under Article 35, paragraph (2) with " selects as the prospective saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of Article 91, paragraph (1)", the term "alternate saiban-in are arranged" under Article 36, paragraph (2) with "the prospective saiban-in of the number exceeding the number of saiban-in are selected", the term "of alternate saiban-in to be appointed " under the paragraph with "exceeding the number of saiban-in of the number of prospective saiban-in that are to be selected" and the term "by adding two when the number of alternate saiban-in is three or four, or by adding three when the number of alternate saiban-in is five or six" with "when the number is an odd number more than three and, in cases of subsequent even numbers, the number equal to one half of such even number".

第九十一条裁判所は、くじその他の作為が加わらない方法として最高裁判所規則で定める方法に従い、裁判員等選任手続の期日に出頭した裁判員候補者で不選任の決定がされなかったものから、前条第一項の規定により裁判所が定めた員数（当該裁判員候補者の員数がこれに満たないときは、その員数）の選任予定裁判員を裁判員（補充裁判員を置くときは、補充裁判員を含む。）に選任されるべき順序を定めて選定する決定をしなければならない。

Article 91(1)In accordance with the procedures, including drawing lots or other such methods as provided for in the Rules of the Supreme Court which are not contrived, a court must render a ruling to select the prospective saiban-in of the number determined by the court pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article (when the number of saiban-in candidates does not satisfy the number determined, such determined number of saiban-in candidates) as the saiban-in (including the alternate saiban-in when the court arranges alternate saiban-in) by specifying the order to be appointed as the saiban-in from among the saiban-in candidates who have appeared on the date of the Saiban-in, etc. Appointing Procedure and for whom a ruling of non-appointment has not been rendered.

２裁判所は、前項の規定により選任予定裁判員に選定された者以外の不選任の決定がされなかった裁判員候補者については、不選任の決定をするものとする。

(2)A court is to render a ruling of non-appointment for saiban-in candidates, other than those having been selected as prospective saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, for whom a ruling of non-appointment has not been rendered.

第九十二条裁判所は、前条第一項の規定により選定された選任予定裁判員の員数が選定すべき選任予定裁判員の員数に満たないときは、不足する員数の選任予定裁判員を選定することができる。

Article 92(1)Where the number of prospective saiban-in who have been selected pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article does not satisfy the number of prospective saiban-in, a court may select the number of prospective saiban-in to accommodate this insufficiency.

２第二十六条（第一項を除く。）から第三十六条（第二項を除く。）まで及び前条の規定は、前項の規定による選任予定裁判員の選定について準用する。この場合において、第二十六条第二項中「前項の決定をした」とあるのは「不足する員数の選任予定裁判員を選定することとした」と、第二十七条第一項ただし書中「期日から」とあるのは「期日及び第九十七条第一項の規定により選任予定裁判員を裁判員に選任する決定がされると見込まれる日から」と、第三十五条第二項中「第三十七条第一項又は第二項の規定により裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任する」とあるのは「第九十二条第二項において読み替えて準用する第九十一条第一項の規定により選任予定裁判員に選定する」と、第三十六条第一項中「四人（第二条第三項の決定があった場合は、三人）」とあるのは「選定すべき選任予定裁判員の員数が一人又は二人のときは一人、三人以上の奇数及びそれに続く偶数の員数のときは当該偶数の員数の二分の一の員数」と、前条第一項中「前条第一項の規定により裁判所が定めた」とあるのは「不足する」と読み替えるものとする。

(2)The provisions of Article 26 (excluding paragraph (1)) to Article 36 (excluding paragraph (2)) and of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis to the selection of the prospective saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.In this case, the term "renders the ruling under the preceding paragraph" under Article 26, paragraph (2) is deemed to be replaced with "determines to select the insufficient number of prospective saiban-in", the term "from the date" under the proviso of Article 27, paragraph (1) with "from the date and the day on which a ruling to appoint the prospective saiban-in as the saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of Article 97, paragraph (1) is expected to be rendered", the term "appoints the saiban-in candidate as a saiban-in or alternate saiban-in is rendered pursuant to the provisions of Article 37, paragraph (1) or (2)" under Article 35, paragraph (2) with "selects as the prospective saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of Article 91, paragraph (1), as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 92, paragraph (2) following the deemed replacement of terms", the term "four saiban-in candidates (when a ruling under Article 2, paragraph (3) is rendered, three )" in Article 36, paragraph (1) with "one person when the number of prospective saiban-in that are to be selected is one or two, and when the number is an odd number more than three and, in cases of a subsequent even numbers, the number equal to one half of such even number" and "determined by the court pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article" in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article with "which is insufficient".

第九十三条検察官、被告人又は弁護人は、裁判所に対し、次の各号のいずれかに該当することを理由として選任予定裁判員の選定の取消しを請求することができる。ただし、第二号に該当することを理由とする請求は、当該選任予定裁判員についてその選定の決定がされた後に知り、又は生じた原因を理由とするものに限る。

Article 93(1)The public prosecutor, the accused or their defense counsel may request a court to revoke the selection of prospective saiban-in on the grounds that any one of the following items is applicable; provided, however, that a request made on the grounds that item (ii) is applicable is limited to those on the basis of grounds that become known or occur in relation to said prospective saiban-in after a ruling of their selection is rendered:

２前項の請求を受けた裁判所は、同項各号のいずれかに該当すると認めるときは、当該選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をする。

(2)A court that receives the request under the preceding paragraph, when it finds that any of each item under the paragraph is applicable, renders a ruling to revoke the selection of the prospective saiban-in.

３前項の決定又は第一項の請求を却下する決定をするには、最高裁判所規則で定めるところにより、あらかじめ、検察官及び被告人又は弁護人の意見を聴かなければならない。

(3)Where a court renders a ruling on the preceding paragraph or a ruling to dismiss the request under paragraph (1), the court must hear the opinion of the public prosecutor and the accused or their defense counsel in advance in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of the Supreme Court.

４第二項の規定により選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をするには、当該選任予定裁判員に陳述の機会を与えなければならない。

(4)Where a court intends to renders a ruling to revoke the selection of the prospective saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (2), the court must provide the prospective saiban-in with the opportunity to state their opinion.

５第一項の請求を却下する決定には、理由を付さなければならない。

(5)A ruling to dismiss the request under paragraph (1) must state the grounds for such dismissal.

第九十四条前条第一項の請求を却下する決定に対しては、当該決定に関与した裁判官の所属する地方裁判所に異議の申立てをすることができる。

Article 94(1)An objection may be filed against a ruling that dismisses the request under paragraph (1) of the preceding Article with the District Court, to which the judges who have participated in the ruling belong.

２前項の異議の申立てを受けた地方裁判所は、合議体で決定をしなければならない。

(2)The District Court with which an objection under the preceding paragraph has been filed must render a ruling by a panel.

３第一項の異議の申立てに関しては、即時抗告に関する刑事訴訟法の規定を準用する。

(3)The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning an immediate appeal apply mutatis mutandis to the filing of an objection under paragraph (1).

第九十五条裁判所は、第九十三条第一項各号のいずれかに該当すると認めるときは、職権で、選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をする。

Article 95(1)A court may, when it finds that each item of Article 93, paragraph (1) is applicable, renders a ruling to revoke the selection of the prospective saiban-in ex officio.

２第九十三条第三項及び第四項の規定は、前項の規定による決定について準用する。

(2)The provisions of Article 93, paragraphs (3) and (4) apply mutatis mutandis to the ruling pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

３裁判所は、次の各号に掲げるいずれかの事由が生じたことにより、選任予定裁判員をその選定に係る区分事件審判又は併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任する必要がなくなった場合には、職権で、当該選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をする。

(3)Where the occurrence of any of the grounds listed in each of the following items makes it no longer necessary to appoint the prospective saiban-in as saiban-in or alternate saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases or a Trial on Consolidated Cases relating to said selection, a court renders a ruling to revoke the selection of said prospective saiban-in ex officio:

４裁判所は、前項に規定する場合のほか、選任予定裁判員をその選定に係る区分事件審判又は併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任する必要がなくなったと認めるときは、当該選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をすることができる。

(4)Beyond the cases set forth in the preceding paragraph, where a court finds that it is no longer necessary, to appoint the prospective saiban-in as saiban-in or alternate saiban-in who carry out the duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases or a Trial on Consolidated Cases relating to their selection, the court may render a ruling to revoke the selection of said prospective saiban-in.

第九十六条選任予定裁判員は、裁判所に対し、第十六条第八号に規定する事由（その選定がされた後に知り、又は生じた原因を理由とするものに限る。）により裁判員又は補充裁判員の職務を行うことが困難であることを理由として選定の取消しの申立てをすることができる。

Article 96(1)Prospective saiban-in may file a petition with a court to revoke their selection on the grounds that it is difficult to carry out the duties of saiban-in or alternate saiban-in due to the grounds set forth in Article 16, item (viii) (which are limited to those which have become known, or which have occurred, after said selection has been made).

２裁判所は、前項の申立てを受けた場合において、その理由があると認めるときは、当該選任予定裁判員の選定を取り消す決定をしなければならない。

(2)When a court receives a petition under the preceding paragraph and finds that the petition has grounds for it, the court must render a ruling to revoke the selection of the prospective saiban-in.

第九十七条裁判所は、第八十四条の規定により区分事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員及び補充裁判員の任務が終了したときは、第三十七条の規定にかかわらず、当該区分事件審判の次の区分事件審判又は併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任されるために選定されている選任予定裁判員で、指定する裁判員等選任手続の期日に出頭したものから、その選定において定められた順序に従い、当該職務を行う裁判員（補充裁判員を置くときは、補充裁判員を含む。第五項において同じ。）を選任する決定をするものとする。

Article 97(1)A court is to, where the duties of the saiban-in and alternate saiban-in who have carried out their duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases has terminated pursuant to the provisions of Article 84, render a ruling, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 37, to appoint a saiban-in (including an alternate saiban-in when the court arranges alternate saiban-in employed; the same applies in paragraph (5)) to carry out the duties from among the prospective saiban-in who have been selected to be appointed as saiban-in or alternate saiban-in who carry out duties pertaining to the subsequent Trial on Divisional Cases or the Trial on Consolidated Cases and have appeared on the designated date for the Saiban-in, etc. Appointing Procedure in accordance with the order determined during the process of selection.

２裁判所は、前項に規定する選任予定裁判員を同項に規定する期日に呼び出さなければならない。

(2)A court must summon the prospective saiban-in set forth in the preceding paragraph on the date set forth in the paragraph.

３前項の呼出しは、選任予定裁判員に通知して行う。

(3)The summons under the preceding paragraph are made by notifying the prospective saiban-in.

４裁判所は、第一項に規定する区分事件審判又は併合事件審判に係る職務を行う裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任されるために選定されている選任予定裁判員のうち、同項の規定により裁判員又は補充裁判員に選任された者以外の者については、選定を取り消す決定をしなければならない。

(4)A court must render a ruling to revoke the selection of the prospective saiban-in, who have been selected to be appointed as the saiban-in or alternate saiban-in who carry out the duties pertaining to a Trial on Divisional Cases or a Trial on Consolidated Cases as set forth in paragraph (1), other than those who have been appointed as the saiban-in or alternate saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1).

５第一項の規定により選任予定裁判員を裁判員に選任する場合における第二十九条第一項及び第二項並びに第三十八条第一項の規定の適用については、第二十九条第一項及び第二項中「裁判員候補者」とあるのは「選任予定裁判員」と、第三十八条第一項中「前条第一項」とあるのは「第九十七条第一項」とする。

(5)With respect to the application of the provisions of Article 29, paragraphs (1) and (2) and Article 38, paragraph (1) when the prospective saiban-in are appointed as the saiban-in pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), the term "the saiban-in candidates" in Article 29, paragraphs (1) and (2) is deemed to be replaced with "the prospective saiban-in" and the term "paragraph (1) of the preceding Article" in Article 38, paragraph (1) with "Article 97, paragraph (1)".

第九十八条第十二条第一項の規定は、選任予定裁判員についてその選定の取消しの判断のため必要がある場合について準用する。

Article 98The provisions of Article 12, paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to cases where it is necessary to determine that the selection of prospective saiban-in should be revoked or not.

第九十九条前三款に定めるもののほか、選任予定裁判員の選定及び裁判員又は補充裁判員への選任に関する手続に関し必要な事項は、最高裁判所規則で定める。

Article 99Beyond the provisions of the preceding three subsections, particulars necessary for the procedure of selecting the prospective saiban-in and their appointment as saiban-in or alternate saiban-in are provided for in the Rules of the Supreme Court.