Code of Criminal Procedure Article 394
This English translation was last updated on 2020-01-15, but the Chinese text was amended on 2026-05-13. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.
The court of third instance shall base its judgment on facts established in the judgment of second instance court, except for matters regarding litigation proceedings or matters the court may sua sponte investigate, on which the court of third instance may investigate the facts.The investigation in the preceding paragraph may be conducted by a commissioned judge and the court of third instance may request judges of other courts to investigate.Where the results of investigation conducted in accordance with the preceding two paragraphs show violations in the procedures of prosecution, the court of third instance may order the defects to be corrected. Where the court that made the original judgment initially had no jurisdiction but subsequently acquired jurisdiction pursuant to laws or regulations amended after the original judgment was made, the said court shall not be deemed not to have jurisdiction.
中文原文 刑事訴訟法第394條
第三審法院應以第二審判決所確認之事實為判決基礎。
但關於訴訟程序及得依職權調查之事項，得調查事實。
前項調查，得以受命法官行之，並得囑託他法院之法官調查。
前二項調查之結果，認為起訴程序違背規定者，第三審法院得命其補正；其法院無審判權而依原審判決後之法令有審判權者，不以無審判權論。
但關於訴訟程序及得依職權調查之事項，得調查事實。
前項調查，得以受命法官行之，並得囑託他法院之法官調查。
前二項調查之結果，認為起訴程序違背規定者，第三審法院得命其補正；其法院無審判權而依原審判決後之法令有審判權者，不以無審判權論。