Among278survey object person,four were transferred to public prosecutors due to being age20or over,138(49.6%)were referred to public prosecutors for criminal disposition,and136(48.9%)were given disposition of protective measures by family courts.Referring to the236serious juvenile offenders aged16or over who were referred to public prosecutors in principle(excluding four juveniles referred to public prosecutors due to being age20or over),135(57.2%)were referred to public prosecutors and the remaining101(42.8%)were granted disposition of protective measures.
  Taking a look at the hearing results for serious juvenile offenders aged16or over,by classification type of offenses,most of the Traffic Type juvenile offenders were referred to public prosecutors.In the case of the Group Type juvenile offenders,decisions depended on various factors,such as whether they were leaders and how much detrimental damages they caused to victims.In contrast,the percentage of disposition of protective measures was high in the case of Family Type juvenile offenders,which included many cases where father victims had problems of alcoholism or violence,juvenile offenders had mental disorders,and females killed their new-born babies etc.Also in the case of Single Type juvenile offenders,those recognized to have mental disorders etc.were granted disposition of protective measures.
  The Amended Juvenile Law stipulates that even in cases resulting in death committed by juvenile offenders aged16or over,referral to public prosecutors may be denied if measures other than criminal disposition are considered to be appropriate,taking into consideration the motive and type of the offense,situation after the offense,and personality,age,behavior,environment and other situations of juveniles.It seems that the hearings were held with careful consideration to individual factors on a case by case basis by family courts.
  We also conducted a survey on the results of criminal trials for juveniles referred to public prosecutors.