CAJ | 학술논문

在日本民事诉讼中，当事人为了准备主张或证明所必要的事项，可以向对方当事人提出书面照会，要求其在指定的适当期限内以书面作出回答，除非存在例外事由。当事人照会制度打破了德国、日本等大陆法系国家民事诉讼中当事人之间不经过法院不能直接向对方收集和了解与案件有关信息的传统做法，而是直接在当事人之间就诉讼上重要的事项交换信息成为可能。对于违反当事人照会法律效果的问题，日本法并未设置制裁措施，这也导致日本多数学者对于当事人照会制度的实效性提出质疑与批判。
재일본민사소송중，당사인위료준비주장혹증명소필요적사항，가이향대방당사인제출서면조회，요구기재지정적괄당기한내이서면작출회답，제비존재예외사유。당사인조회제도타파료덕국、일본등대륙법계국가민사소송중당사인지간불경과법원불능직접향대방수집화료해여안건유관신식적전통주법，이시직접재당사인지간취소송상중요적사항교환신식성위가능。대우위반당사인조회법률효과적문제，일본법병미설치제재조시，저야도치일본다수학자대우당사인조회제도적실효성제출질의여비판。
In Japanese civil litigations, the parties could present inquiry to opponent for preparing to advocate or for proving necessary matters, which demands the opponent to response in writing to notiifcation within the speciifed time limit unless there are exceptional reasons. The inquiry system breaks the traditional practices in the Continental Law countries, like Germany and Japan, that in civil litigations the parties are not allowed to collect evidence and to ifnd out related information about the case from the opponent directly without permission by the court, and makes it possible to exchange information of important matters directly between the parties. With regard to legal effect, the Japanese Law so far has not set up sanction measures for violating the inquiry system, which leads to most Japanese scholars questioning and criticizing the effectiveness of the system.