1. Judgment ex officio in relation to participatory trials

A. A participatory trial implemented under the Act on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials (hereinafter “Act”) is a system introduced to enhance democratic legitimacy and confidence in the judiciary.

(Article 1 of the Act). According to the Participatory Trial Act, any person has a right to a participatory trial, as provided by law.

(Article 3(1) of the Act provides that a case subject to a participatory trial shall proceed in accordance with the procedure for a participatory trial in accordance with the law. However, a participatory trial shall not be held exceptionally only where a defendant does not want a participatory trial or a court decides to exclude a case due to a reason under any subparagraph of

(Article 5(1) and (2) of the Act. As such, whether a participatory trial is held or not is decided first by Defendant’s intention, if a case subject to a participatory trial is indicted, the court must confirm Defendant’s intention to whether a participatory trial is desired in writing or by other means.

(Article 8(1) of the Act. For this purpose, a copy of the indictment shall be served on the accused or his/her defense counsel along with a copy of the indictment, in which the procedure for a participatory trial, submission of documents under Article 8(2) of the Act, restrictions on the change of proceedings under Article 8(4) of the Act, and other precautions are stated.

(Article 3(1) of the Rules on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials. If a court proceeds a trial to a ordinary trial without confirming the defendant's desire for a participatory trial, it is a serious infringement on the defendant's right to a participatory trial, and the procedure is unlawful and its procedural action is also null and void.

Supreme Court Decision 2011Do7106 Decided September 8, 2011