1. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles as to the scope of the effect of restriction on re-prosecution, Article 262(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "the court shall make a decision in accordance with the following classifications within three months from the date on which the application for adjudication was received, in accordance with the procedure for appeal. In this case, evidence may be examined if necessary. 1. When the application violates or is groundless, the application shall be dismissed. 2. When the application is justified, a decision of prosecution against the case shall be made." Article 262(4) provides that "No objection against the decision under paragraph (2) shall be made. No prosecution shall be made except where other important evidence is discovered."

As such, the latter part of Article 262(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that prosecution may not be initiated except where other important evidence is found for a case for which a decision to dismiss an application for adjudication has become final and conclusive. On the other hand, the court’s decision to dismiss an application for adjudication has taken into account the following factors: (a) the public prosecutor’s indictment of a case for which a decision to dismiss an application for adjudication has become final and conclusive may result in waste of judicial personnel and budget in cases where the defendant would be in an overly unstable state if he/she would be allowed without restriction of prosecution by a public prosecutor despite the fact that a decision to dismiss an application for adjudication has become final and conclusive; and (b) on the other hand, the court’s decision on a case for which an application for adjudication has been filed has no effect of res judicata; and (c) the whole prohibition of prosecution exclusively by the

In light of the above provisions and legislative intent of the Criminal Procedure Act.