When you think of a criminal trial, the first thing that comes to mind is the first scene of the trial, where a prosecutor in court uniform reads the indictment. In order for a trial to be held for the defendant like this, the substantive law concept that a crime is simply established and the right to punishment arises is not enough, and the necessary conditions under the procedural law must be met in order to file a prosecution for each crime. These are called ‘prosecution conditions’, and in our criminal law, these include pro-reporting and anti-injury non-punishment crimes.
A pro-reporting crime refers to a crime in which a prosecution can only be filed if the victim or the person with the right to file a complaint files a complaint, while an anti-intentional non-punishment crime is a crime in which a prosecution is possible even without a complaint, but it is judged that there are no conditions for prosecution if the victim expresses that he or she does not want to be punished. The purpose of the crime of pro-reporting is basically to prevent the victim from being punished without a complaint from the victim if the investigative agency arbitrarily investigates, which may result in disadvantages such as infringement on the victim's reputation or privacy, and if the victim and the criminal have a special relationship such as a relative, etc. In that it is intended to do so, it can be seen as having the same meaning as the crime of non-punishment against a will, which takes into account the victim's intention to be punished.
So what is the reason for distinguishing between these two and stipulating them in our criminal code? Looking at the history of the enactment and revision of the Criminal Act, the general consensus is that, unfortunately, it was not introduced after intense logical deliberation. When the “Criminal Act” was first enacted on September 18, 1953 after liberation, the crime of impunity against a will, which was devised in the Japanese revised criminal law draft in March 1940, was accepted as is, but Japan continued discussions and changed the existing law in the preliminary draft of the revised criminal law in 1961. As in, only the crime of pro-reporting was adopted and the crime of impunity against the doctor was not introduced. Nevertheless, our criminal law maintains the framework of impunity against wrongdoing to this day.
A pro-reporting crime refers to a crime in which a prosecution can only be filed if the victim or the person with the right to file a complaint files a complaint, while an anti-intentional non-punishment crime is a crime in which a prosecution is possible even without a complaint, but it is judged that there are no conditions for prosecution if the victim expresses that he or she does not want to be punished. The purpose of the crime of pro-reporting is basically to prevent the victim from being punished without a complaint from the victim if the investigative agency arbitrarily investigates, which may result in disadvantages such as infringement on the victim's reputation or privacy, and if the victim and the criminal have a special relationship such as a relative, etc. In that it is intended to do so, it can be seen as having the same meaning as the crime of non-punishment against a will, which takes into account the victim's intention to be punished.
So what is the reason for distinguishing between these two and stipulating them in our criminal code? Looking at the history of the enactment and revision of the Criminal Act, the general consensus is that, unfortunately, it was not introduced after intense logical deliberation. When the “Criminal Act” was first enacted on September 18, 1953 after liberation, the crime of impunity against a will, which was devised in the Japanese revised criminal law draft in March 1940, was accepted as is, but Japan continued discussions and changed the existing law in the preliminary draft of the revised criminal law in 1961. As in, only the crime of pro-reporting was adopted and the crime of impunity against the doctor was not introduced. Nevertheless, our criminal law maintains the framework of impunity against wrongdoing to this day.
