Whether someone is detained is often decided in the day around the warrant hearing

Arrest & Detention Warrants Matters We Handle

1. Detention Warrant Hearing — Showing why grounds for and need of detention are lackingThe judge examines whether there is reasonable cause to suspect the person committed a crime, and whether the person has no fixed residence or is likely to destroy evidence or flee. The judge also considers the seriousness of the crime, the risk of reoffending and the risk of harm to the victim. Defense counsel may attend the hearing and state an opinion.Analysis of the grounds stated in the warrant application and request · Review of how strongly the suspicion is supported · Preparing records of residence, family and employment · Summarizing progress on restitution and settlement · Attending the hearing and submitting a written opinion
2. Review of Legality of Detention — Re-examining legality and necessity after detentionAn arrested or detained suspect, defense counsel, family members, cohabitants, employers and others may petition the competent court for a review of the legality of detention. The court must question the suspect within 48 hours of receiving the petition, and a detained suspect may be released on condition of posting a bond.Review of how the detention came about and the grounds in the warrant · Summarizing changes in circumstances since the warrant was issued · Submitting restitution and settlement records · Preparing records of measures against reoffending and treatment · Considering release on bond
3. Early Response to Arrest and Search & Seizure — The first 48 hours after arrest and mobile phone forensicsAn arrest may be made under an arrest warrant, as an emergency arrest, or as an arrest of a person caught in the act. To detain someone after arrest, a detention warrant must be requested within 48 hours. When mobile phones and electronic devices are seized, key issues are whether the right to be present is guaranteed and whether the search is limited to information related to the alleged offense.Reviewing the type of arrest and whether its requirements were met · Meeting with counsel and counsel's presence during questioning · Checking the scope of seizure and the right to be present · Taking part in the selection of electronic information · Setting the direction of statements
4. Bail After Indictment — Release procedure at the trial stageAfter charges are filed, the defendant may apply for bail. Unless an exception set by law applies, such as an offense punishable by more than 10 years, repeat or habitual offending, or a risk of destroying evidence or fleeing, the court must grant bail.Review of exceptions to mandatory bail · Plan for complying with bail conditions · Proposing measures to protect the victim · Responding to renewal of the detention period

1. Requirements for Arrest and Detention

Grounds for detention exist when there is reasonable cause to suspect that the person committed a crime and the person (1) has no fixed residence, (2) is likely to destroy evidence, or (3) has fled or is likely to flee (Article 70(1) and Article 201(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). In examining these grounds, the judge also considers the seriousness of the crime, the risk of reoffending, and the risk of harm to the victim and key witnesses (Article 70(2)). For crimes punishable by a fine of KRW 500,000 or less, penal detention or a minor fine, a person may be detained only if he or she has no fixed residence.

There are three kinds of arrest.

• Arrest under an arrest warrant: When a person fails, or is likely to fail, to appear on summons without a justifiable reason, a judicial police officer applies to the prosecutor, and a judge issues the warrant at the prosecutor's request (Article 200-2).
• Emergency arrest: When there is reasonable cause to suspect a crime punishable by death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a maximum of 3 years or more, there is a risk of destroying evidence or fleeing, and there is no time to obtain a warrant, a judicial police officer may arrest without a warrant. Immediately after the arrest, the officer must obtain the prosecutor's approval and prepare an emergency arrest report (Article 200-3).
• Arrest of a person caught in the act: Anyone may arrest without a warrant a person who is committing or has just committed a crime (Article 212). However, case law also requires a need for arrest, namely a risk of fleeing or destroying evidence.

2. Deadlines at Each Stage

The period from the day the court receives the case file for the warrant hearing to the day it returns the file, and the period during which the review file is with the court, are not counted toward the detention period (Article 201-2(7) and Article 214-2(13)).

3. From Warrant Application to Decision

1. Application by the judicial police officer: The judicial police officer applies to the prosecutor for a detention warrant, attaching material showing the need for detention. If a warrant for the same criminal facts was previously applied for, requested or issued, the reason for applying again must be stated (Article 201(5) and (6)).
2. Review and request by the prosecutor: To decide whether to request a warrant, the prosecutor may meet the suspect or ask the judicial police officer for an opinion, and during the meeting the prosecutor must guarantee the assistance of counsel, including counsel's presence (Article 201(7) and (8)). If necessary, the prosecutor may ask the judicial police officer for supplementary investigation (Article 197-2(1)2).
3. Questioning by the judge: A suspect who has not been arrested is brought to court under a warrant of compulsory appearance and then questioned. The prosecutor and defense counsel may attend the hearing and state their opinions (Article 201-2).
4. Issuance or dismissal: If the request is dismissed, the suspect is released and investigated without detention. If the warrant is issued, the investigation continues with the suspect in detention, and a review of the legality of detention or bail after indictment is considered.

4. Practical Issues and How to Respond

• Showing residence and a stable life: Resident registration and actual residence, family relationships, a certificate of employment or business records, and dependents are the basic materials for disputing a risk of flight.
• Risk of destroying evidence: Relevant factors include whether the mobile phone and records have already been seized and whether the suspect could contact accomplices or the victim. It helps to present concrete measures, such as an undertaking not to make contact or a plan to keep away from the victim.
• How strongly the suspicion is supported: If the suspicion itself is disputed, the grounds are set out in a written opinion. However, changing statements at the warrant stage can raise credibility problems, so the direction of statements must be decided carefully.
• Restitution: Settlement, a court deposit for the victim, and a plan to repay the damage affect how the seriousness of the crime and the risk of reoffending are assessed.
• Illegal arrest or seizure procedures: Missing requirements for an emergency arrest, a skipped approval step, or failure to guarantee the right to be present during seizure of electronic information can be challenged in the review of detention and later at trial as issues of admissibility of evidence.
• Choosing between review of detention and bail: Before indictment, the main release procedure is a review of the legality of detention; after indictment, it is bail. Because the review decision cannot be appealed (Article 214-2(8)), it is better to petition after gathering sufficient material on changed circumstances.

Key Court Decisions

Supreme Court Decision 2015Do13726, decided February 18, 2016

The Court held that arresting a person caught in the act requires, in addition to the crime being current and obvious, a need for arrest in the form of a risk of fleeing or destroying evidence, and that whether these requirements are met is judged based on the circumstances at the time of arrest.

Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Mo1839, decided July 16, 2015

The Court held that the person whose items were seized, or that person's counsel, must be given the opportunity to be present even when a storage medium is taken to an investigative agency's office to be copied, searched and printed, and that freely copying or printing electronic information unrelated to the alleged offense is an illegal seizure.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Legal Guides

Criminal Defense Case Results

Written on the basis of Korean statutes in force (National Law Information Center, Ministry of Government Legislation) and court precedents as of October 20, 2026. Results may differ with amendments to the law or the facts of each case. This page is general information, not legal advice.

Written and reviewed by Attorney Dongwoo Shin — Ph.D. in Law; certified criminal law specialist and certified divorce law specialist registered with the Korean Bar Association. He handles each case personally from consultation to judgment. About the attorney →
Last updated October 20, 2026