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

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

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)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)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.

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.

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).

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.

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)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)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)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)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).

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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)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).

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)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)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.

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:

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).

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)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)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.

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).

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.

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)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.

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)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".

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)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.

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)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".

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

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

(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).

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

(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)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.

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)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.

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

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

(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)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)".

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.

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.