A Study on Improvements in Summary Procedure

The merit of summary procedure lies in the fact that it is conducted not by public trial but by documentary examination thus enabling minor and simple criminal cases to be processed quickly. But it is pointed that in real, summary procedures take too much time. The range of subjects competent for summary procedure is narrow, the formality in demanding summary orders is unclear, and regulations concerning forwarding cases to procedures in public trial by authority need reforms. Also, unreasonable results brought by applying the principle of 'prohibition against a change to the disadvantage of the accused, process delays in public trial demanded cases, sudden increases of appeals of public trial demanded cases are pointed out as the problems of current public trial demand procedure provisions. In order to solve these problems, improvements such as the followings are required. First, improvements for speeding up the process of summary cases. 1) Shortening terms of criminal indictments by, creating manuals for cooperation between the police and the prosecutors office, making summary indictments utilizing electronic documents. 2) Shortening terms of document examinations by assigning summary orders to exclusive courts. 3) Shortening terms of executions of summary orders by. assigning conveyance locations, clarifying provisions stipulating conveyance by public announcement, conveying orders by electronic documents. Second, rationalizing summary procedure 1) Adjusting subjects of summary procedure 2) Clarifying forms of demanding summary orders 3) Improving provisions stipulating public trial submissions by authority Third, suggestions on improving public trial procedure provisions 1) Excluding application of the principle of 'prohibition against a change to the disadvantage of the accused'. 2) Introduction of dismissal without of oral proceedings and expanding the range of trials by default 3) Introduction of special provisions regarding summoning the accused demanding public trial. 4) Simplifying the procedure of public trial demands Fourth, suggestions on restraining public trial demanded cases entering the Supreme Court 1) Introducing appeal courts in High Courts 2) Limiting causes of appeal in minor cases such as summary cases If the above suggested improvements come true, the summary procedure will make much more contribution not only to efficient case handling of the criminal judiciary agencies or organizations, but to speedy release of defendants from the burden of the procedure