Challenge(1)

The court house have ignored what I had also raised of February 26,the 21rd year of Heisei[2009] though they had said what I had raised of January 30,the 21rd year of Heisei[2009] about my allegation to challenge. This contradicts. They don't admit my allegation to challenge of February 26,the 21rd year of Heisei[2009] . on the other hand, because the unlawfulness of dismissal before may allegation to challenge about case number:the 21rd year of Heisei[2009][code:Ra]No.88, was admitted on the same days and by the same presiding judge,it contradicts.

Preservation of evidence

Preservation of evidence

They have ignored what I had also raised of February 26,the 21rd year of Heisei[2009] as the above-mentioned though they had said what I had raised of January 30,the 21rd year of Heisei[2009]. This contradicts. They didn't admit my allegation to challenge of February 26,the 21rd year of Heisei. On the other hand, in the following:the 21rd year of Heisei[2009][code:Ra]No.88,because the cancellation of dismissal before my challenge was decided on the same days,it'slawsuit disturbance.

Preservation of evidence

The case number 88 which my challenge was admitted

The case number 88 which my challenge was admitted

HOME
Defendant1
Defendant2
Legal aid
Legal-aid2
Challenge1
Challenge2
Challenge3
Presentation
Prosecution1
Prosecution2
Impeachment
Dun
Custody
menumenutitle