Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act Article 20-1
When a judgment of ordering for an observation, rehabilitation or a compulsory rehabilitation is finalized, the person ordered to undergo an observation, rehabilitation or a compulsory rehabilitation program, who objects to such an order, his/her legal representative, his/her spouse, or the prosecutor with a written statement describing the reasons, may petition the court previously adjudicating the case, for a new trial under any of the following circumstances:1.The application of the law was erroneous, so much so that it affects the outcome of the ruling.2.The evidence used in adjudicating the case originally has been proven falsified or altered.3.The testimony, authentication or interpretation used in adjudicating the case originally has been proven false.4.The judge originally adjudicating the case, or the prosecutor participating in the case originally, was proven guilty in committing an offense while performing duty involving this case.5.Newly discovered evidence supporting the fact that the person ordered to undergo an observation, rehabilitation, or compulsory rehabilitation program should not receive such a treatment.6.It has been proven that the person ordered to undergo an observation, rehabilitation, or a compulsory rehabilitation program is wrongly accused.Petition for a new trial should be filed within 30 days after the judgment is final. However, if the causes for petition only become known afterwards, then count from the date of knowledge.Petition for a new trial has no impact over the execution of an observation, rehabilitation, or a compulsory rehabilitation program. However, if the court that entered the original judgment deems that there is a need to stop the execution, the court may stop the execution ex officio or pursuant to the petitioner's request.If a court deems that the petition has no grounds for a new trial, or that the procedure is unlawful, a judgment of denial should be entered. If a court deems the case has sufficient grounds for a new trial, it should enter a judgment as such. If a petition is deemed groundless and is denied by a court, it should not be re-petitioned for a new trial on the same grounds.The petition for a new trial may be withdrawn before the judgment is delivered. The withdrawn petition shall not be re-petitioned on the same grounds for a new trial.
中文原文 毒品危害防制條例第20-1條
觀察、勒戒及強制戒治之裁定確定後，有下列情形之一，認為應不施以觀察、勒戒或強制戒治者，受觀察、勒戒或強制戒治處分之人，或其法定代理人、配偶，或檢察官得以書狀敘述理由，聲請原裁定確定法院重新審理：
一、適用法規顯有錯誤，並足以影響裁定之結果者。
二、原裁定所憑之證物已證明為偽造或變造者。
三、原裁定所憑之證言、鑑定或通譯已證明其為虛偽者。
四、參與原裁定之法官，或參與聲請之檢察官，因該案件犯職務上之罪，已經證明者。
五、因發現確實之新證據足認受觀察、勒戒或強制戒治處分之人，應不施以觀察、勒戒或強制戒治者。
六、受觀察、勒戒或強制戒治處分之人，已證明其係被誣告者。
聲請重新審理，應於裁定確定後三十日內提起。
但聲請之事由，知悉在後者，自知悉之日起算。
聲請重新審理，無停止觀察、勒戒或強制戒治執行之效力。
但原裁定確定法院認為有停止執行之必要者，得依職權或依聲請人之聲請，停止執行之。
法院認為無重新審理之理由，或程序不合法者，應以裁定駁回之；認為有理由者，應重新審理，更為裁定。
法院認為無理由裁定駁回聲請者，不得更以同一原因，聲請重新審理。
重新審理之聲請，於裁定前得撤回之。
撤回重新審理之人，不得更以同一原因，聲請重新審理。
一、適用法規顯有錯誤，並足以影響裁定之結果者。
二、原裁定所憑之證物已證明為偽造或變造者。
三、原裁定所憑之證言、鑑定或通譯已證明其為虛偽者。
四、參與原裁定之法官，或參與聲請之檢察官，因該案件犯職務上之罪，已經證明者。
五、因發現確實之新證據足認受觀察、勒戒或強制戒治處分之人，應不施以觀察、勒戒或強制戒治者。
六、受觀察、勒戒或強制戒治處分之人，已證明其係被誣告者。
聲請重新審理，應於裁定確定後三十日內提起。
但聲請之事由，知悉在後者，自知悉之日起算。
聲請重新審理，無停止觀察、勒戒或強制戒治執行之效力。
但原裁定確定法院認為有停止執行之必要者，得依職權或依聲請人之聲請，停止執行之。
法院認為無重新審理之理由，或程序不合法者，應以裁定駁回之；認為有理由者，應重新審理，更為裁定。
法院認為無理由裁定駁回聲請者，不得更以同一原因，聲請重新審理。
重新審理之聲請，於裁定前得撤回之。
撤回重新審理之人，不得更以同一原因，聲請重新審理。