In short
Withdrawal of a complaint may give a result of discontinuance only on offences that depend on a complaint. The same effect is not assumed on an offence prosecuted of the office's own motion. Discontinuance is not the giving of a penalty to the other side. The closing of the action is not the signature ending the file by itself either. The authority where the file stands gives the decision. Mediation is not the long form of this sentence. The institution stands in the article on what mediation is. Which offence depends on a complaint is read from the characterisation in the file.
Discontinuance is spoken on an offence that depends on a complaint
An offence that depends on a complaint is an offence whose investigation and prosecution were tied to a complaint. In this kind, the withdrawal of the person harmed by the offence may give a result of discontinuance. The result is spoken by the petition reaching the prosecutor's office or the court, and by the authority's decision. If the name of the offence is written in the petition differently from the characterisation in the file, the withdrawal does not by itself make that different name depend on a complaint. If an act characterised in the file as insult is written in the petition under another name, the document does not change the character by itself. The elements of the offence of insult are in the article on the offence of insult. An insult committed against a public officer by reason of their duty may stay outside this example. The separation is read from the characterisation in the file. The time for a complaint of insult is not calculated on this page.
On an offence that depends on a complaint, withdrawal may, unless the statute writes otherwise, as a rule be made until the judgment becomes final. This limit is not a number of days. Whether the judgment has become final is read from the decision in the file. If an appeal or a further appeal is continuing, finality is assessed separately. If the rule of the concrete offence narrows this limit, the document is read according to that rule. This page does not produce a list of offences and a separate time for each.
The statute also looks, on some offences, for acceptance of the withdrawal by the suspect or the accused. The condition of acceptance does not stand with the same sentence on every offence. The article in the file shows whether acceptance will be looked for. If acceptance is looked for and there is no acceptance on the record, the sentence of withdrawal by itself is not treated as having given birth to a decision of discontinuance. If acceptance is not looked for, the other side's silence does not take the discontinuance back by itself. This page does not list on which article acceptance is looked for. The record, if there is one, carries the statement of acceptance too.
The same sentence is not looked for on an offence prosecuted of the office's own motion
On an offence prosecuted of the office's own motion, the public action is not tied in the same way to the victim's complaint. A sentence of "I am not a complainant" or "I withdrew" does not, on this offence, give the result of discontinuance on an offence that depends on a complaint. The prosecutor's office or the court is not obliged to close the file with this sentence. The sentence is not a key of passage to an offence that depends on a complaint either. The statement still stands in the file. At the hearing, it is read as the fact that the person harmed said this sentence. It does not mean the public action was discontinued.
An allegation of fraud is among the examples of this separation. The own papers of that application are in the article on a complaint of fraud. Saying "I withdrew the complaint" on fraud does not by itself build the discontinuance on an offence that depends on a complaint. That a payment was made does not secure this transformation by itself either. If which act the receipt was written for stands on the record, it is read from there.
Withdrawal does not build the result of the file in advance. The result is built by reading the characterisation and the stage. A statement given while the investigation continues, and a statement given in the prosecution, are read with the paper they are on even if they are the same sentence. The course of the investigation is in the article on how a prosecutor's investigation runs. A withdrawal given after a prosecution was opened may speak of discontinuance on an offence that depends on a complaint, and if the conditions the statute looks for are there. That a prosecution was opened on an offence prosecuted of the office's own motion does not add an extra effect of discontinuance to the withdrawal.
Which person and which act the withdrawal covers
The document writes which act was withdrawn from, and which person. If there is more than one person, whom it is directed at stands on the line. If there is more than one act, which act is covered is written. A general sentence of "I withdraw from everything", if it does not show the act and the person, leaves the scope uncertain. An uncertain sentence does not have the authority discontinue every act by itself. A sentence written narrowly does not cover the act that was not written either.
If there is more than one person harmed by the offence, each person's statement is read in their own name. One person's sentence does not erase the other's complaint. If the other complaint stands in the file, discontinuance is read separately for that statement. A withdrawal about one of the persons alleged to have taken part in the offence together does not cover the other, unless the statute writes otherwise. If a separate sentence will be built for each accused, the sentence is written apart. It is not assumed that one name stood in for the other.
A relative's sentence is not the statement of the person harmed by the offence. A spouse, a mother, a father, or a friend speaks in their own name. If there is no record of representation, someone else's withdrawal is not built. A guardian reads the capacity of representation, on a bodily injury of the child, from the custody record. If that record is not there, this page does not invent an order of signatures. Withdrawal of a complaint does not mean the personal-right claim was withdrawn. Discontinuance in the criminal file does not end a compensation action by itself. An amount, a ratio, and a calculation of non-pecuniary loss are not on this page.
A paper thought to have been signed under pressure must be notified separately. The notification does not erase the text of the document by itself. The authority reads the statement as it is in the file. How the pressure would be built is not told on this page. The person who notifies writes in what condition they signed the paper and which record they have in hand. They do not propose a new condition to the other side.
An oral statement is not counted as a withdrawal before it passes onto the record
If the withdrawal is oral, it must pass onto the record. If it is not on the record, the statement is not treated as made. If it is in writing, the signature stands on the same document as the act and the person line. Reading before signing the record is for seeing which act was withdrawn from. A signature put without reading does not widen the scope, and it does not narrow it either. Whatever the text writes is what is read. A limit that is not on the record is not added later from this page.
The statement may pass, in the investigation stage, onto a record of the prosecutor's office or the police, and in the prosecution stage onto the court record. Even if the two records carry the same sentence, their dates differ. Which one will be counted as effective is read according to the stage and the character of the offence. Writing "I withdrew" by hand on a complaint petition given earlier is not, by itself, a statement in proper form. A separate record, or a signed petition, must show the act and the person. A note in the margin of the old petition looks like a new will. The authority may take the margin note for the original text.
An excuse petition is not a withdrawal. A document of being unable to go to the hearing does not mean the complaint was turned back from. If the two wills are joined with the same sentence on the same paper, the authority may not be able to separate which one is wanted. If an excuse will be written, the excuse is written. If a withdrawal will be written, the act and the person are written clearly.
A mediation record does not stand in for this document
Mediation is a separate procedure in which the parties agreed on a performance. Withdrawal is a statement by which the person harmed by the offence takes back the will to complain. If the record writes a settlement, that record is not read as a copy of the withdrawal petition. If the two papers stand in the same file, each is read from its own sentence. If a settlement was not reached, that it was not reached is read from the record. A mediation that was not reached is not counted as a withdrawal by itself. A mediation that was reached does not widen by itself the scope of a withdrawal petition that stands beside it either.
That a payment was made is not, by itself, a document of withdrawal. If which act the payment was written for stands on the receipt or the record, it is read from there. If there is no receipt, the payment is not completed from this page as a withdrawal. The failure to perform the performance is the own result of the mediation record. That result is not carried onto the withdrawal petition and made a bargaining sentence again. Separating which paper is which document shows the basis of the decision of discontinuance.
The name in the file is read before the signature
Before the withdrawal document is signed, it is looked at under which name the offence was written in the file. If the name does not belong to an offence that depends on a complaint, the signature may not produce discontinuance. If the name carries more than one act, whichever the document covers is the one that is read. An act that stays outside the scope does not close by itself with the signature. If there is doubt, the document writes the date of the act and the person. It does not change the article of the offence by a guess. Writing the article number wrongly does not make an offence that does not depend on a complaint into one that depends on a complaint.
The person who used the right of complaint, and the person who suffered the loss from their own assets, do not have to be the same. On a loss of a company or an association, the signature stands with a document of representation. If there is no representation, a signature put in the name of the legal person is not counted as that person's withdrawal. A natural person may withdraw, in their own name, from the act they themselves saw. If the two capacities are melted on the same line, the authority may not be able to separate which one put the will. If the will will be separated, two separate sentences are written.
Conclusion
Withdrawal may give a result of discontinuance on an offence that depends on a complaint, and with the conditions the statute looks for. The same result is not assumed on an offence prosecuted of the office's own motion. The document must show the act and the person. One person's sentence does not erase the other's complaint. Mediation is a separate document. The frame is on the pages of criminal law and how a victim's rights are used. The contact route is there for the scope of the statement. The procedural basis is the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271.