Karyo (non-penal fine) (過料)
Karyo (non-penal fine) is the one of sanctions in the collection of money (fines) in Japan. Although Karyo (non-penal fine) is a monetary punishment, it is not a punishment such as a fine or a petty fine. Since the pronunciation is the same as another 'Karyo' which means a petty fine, Karyo which means a non-penal fine is often called 'ayamachi-ryo' and the another one 'toga-ryo' to distinguish the two fines.
Before the modern penal code (criminal code) established after the Meiji Restoration; however, there were cases that a minor punishment by seizing assets was called a 'Karyo' (there was no word for petty fines [Karyo] in this period) so you need to pay attention to these mixed terms.
There are many laws and regulations for imposing punishment of Karyo, but those legal characteristics are not uniformly formed and there are many legal principles and procedures applicable. Generally, the application of Karyo can be divided into three categories.
Karyo as Chitsujo-batsu (a punishment for disturbing administrative order). Karyo as Shikko-batsu (a punishment for non-execution of a duty in a fixed period of time). Karyo as Chokai-batsu (a punishment for disciplinary action). In any case, Karyo is not a penal punishment so general provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure would not directly apply to Karyo. The general laws to impose punishment procedures of Karyo are the regulations of Non-Contentious Cases Procedures Act and the regulations of the Local Autonomy Law II, Ordinary local public entities, Chapter 14, supplementary rules, Article 255-3. In others cases, procedures of independent cases are often determined by individual laws and ordinances. In addition, a court of justice often participates in procedures to impose.
Non-Contentious Cases Procedures Act (Act No. 14: June 21, 1898)
The Article No. 161, Non-penal fine case (a case in regards to the court procedures for Karyo), except the cases that other laws and ordinances have special rules, is under the jurisdiction of a district court which exercises jurisdiction over the seat for general venue of the party concerned.
Karyo as Chitsujo-batsu (a punishment for disturbing administrative order). Karyo as Chitsujo-batsu (a punishment for disturbing administrative order) includes a fine for violation of one's obligations or duties in civil affairs, for violation of one's obligations or duties in civil suit, for violation of one's obligations or duties in administrative matters and for violation of local public entities ordinances and regulations.
Karyo for violation of one's obligations or duties in civil affairs. and so on. Karyo for violation of one's obligations or duties in civil suit.
For an example, Code of Civil Procedure: Article 192
Karyo for violation of one's obligations or duties in administrative matters.
For example, Residential Basic Book Act: Article 50
Karyo for violation of local public entities ordinances and regulations
For example, The Local Autonomy Law II, Ordinary local public entities, Clause 143
It is collected by corresponding application for disposition of delinquency and other laws (The Local Autonomy Law II, Chapter 9, Finance, Article 231-3)
Karyo as Shikko-batsu (a punishment for non-execution of a duty in a fixed period of time). Shikko-batsu is an advance notice (or warning) to impose the fixed amount of Karyo on default of a duty that only a specific obligated party can be able to delivery (or execute) the performance of the duty or on default of a duty that delivery or execution of a specific performance is forbidden by a law. Thus, the execution of one's duties is urged indirectly by a psychological coercion on the obligated party. If the obligated party does not fulfill the duty even after receiving the advance notice (or warning), a written resolution is issued to order payment. If the obligated party does not obey the order, Karyo conserned is collected forcibly, following the disposition of the National Tax delinquency.
This punishment is considered to be weak on practically and prevention effect in comparison with criminal punishment, so only sabo-ho (Erosion Control Act), the Article 36, provides it in current Japanese law.
Sabo-ho (Erosion Control Act, March 30, 1897, Law No.29)
The Article 36: If a private party may fail to fulfill a duty to abide by this law or a duty of an order established by this law, Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism or prefectural governors shall give the obligated party a designated time period to fulfill the duty in an advance notice (or warning). Also, an administrative agency shall order to fulfill the duty by issuing an advance notice to the obligated party, who shall be imposed punishment of Karyo which is a specific amount of less than five hundred yen if the obligated party would not comply with the duty; the obligated party fail to execute the performance of duty by the designated time period; or obligated party's performance would not be sufficient enough to full fill the duty."
In the Article No. 53 of the Old River Act, Shikko-batsu had been included until the law was abolished in April 1, 1965.
Karyo as Chokai-batsu (a punishment for disciplinary action). Chokai (a disciplinary punishment) means that an obligated party would be imposed a punishment in violation of the duty. The Article 2 of Judges Status Act and the Article 80, No. 2 of Notary Act are examples.
In addition, Karyo imposed on Saiban-in (Lay Judge) (or prospective lay judges) due to false statements and a violation on duty of appearance under Saiban-in System is considered as chokai-batsu. (The Law of Criminal Suit in which Lay Judge participated, Article 82, 83.)
Karyo in history of legislation.
However, during medieval and the early-modern times in Japan, a negligible punishment by seizing assets was called 'Karyo.'
It includes a punishment and a penalty corresponding current petty fines and penal fines; therefore, it is a kind of a penal punishment.
The Ritsuryo law established the Shokudo (penalty charges which was paid with copper coins) system to impose punishment and for collection of penal fines, but later the Ritsuryo law enforcement power revoked, resulting in less strict penal punishments. A minor crime was called 'katai (negligence),' which was utilized for the toward the cost of repairing shrines, temples, road and bridges by collecting money instead of imposing a prison sentence. It provided proof of an apology against Gods, Buddha, and society.
The payment of punishment fines was called 'Katai-sen' and 'Katai-ryo,' later this was shortened and called 'Kasen' and 'Karyo.'
In Goseibai-shikimoku (code of conduct for samurai), Article 15, a person who was found to commit perjury at a trial was ordered to repair temples and shrines. In the supplementary articles issued to cover the Article 15, the terms of 'Kajibutsu' (Article 231, in 1244) and 'Karyo' (Article 292, in 1253) were used. Karyo,' 'Katai-sen' and other similar punishments by the seizing assets were enforced under the Honjo (proprietor or guarantor of manor) law which dealt with shoen (manor in medieval Japan), the Bunkokuho (the law individual sengoku-daimyo enforced within their own domain) which dealt with daimyo (Japanese territorial lord) in the Sengoku period and the customary laws for commoners.
During Edo Bakufu (Japanese feudal government headed by a shogun) ruling period, "Kajoruiten" (a collection of classified regulations and laws) mentioned that Karyo was imposed on a lender who made a debt contract by using an empty promissory note the first time in 1718, therefore, there was a theory that Yoshimune TOKUGAWA introduced Karyo as a part of Kyoho-no-kaikaku (Kyoho reform). Therefore, the scholars theorized the administration of Yoshimune TOKUGAWA introduced a Karyo, forming a part of the Kyoho-no-kaikaku (Kyoho reform). The ban on tobacco issued on November 21, 1616 had already stated that any farmer growing tobacco and a daikan (a local governor) with administration of the territory in which the farmer resided shall be imposed Karyo ("Tobu Jitsuroku"). In conclusion, Karyo had been a means of punishment in individual cases since the early period of Edo Bakufu. Of course, it is also fact that Karyo was systematized under Kujigata-osadamegaki (the law of Edo bakufu) provided by Yoshimune TOKUGAWA. According to the law of Kujigata-osadamegaki, the penalty of Karyo was organized into five cases; 'Karyo' was three kanmon (3 kanmon = 30 yen) or five kanmon (5 kanmon = 50 yen); 'A heavy Karyo' was ten kanmon (10 kanmon = 100 yen); 'Karyo adjusted by wealth (or fortune)' was dependent on a personal financial position (or wealth); 'Karyo adjusted by Koma (a small room which used as a measurement unit to calculate the scale of the house)' was dependent on the scale of the personal household (adjusted by wealth); 'A Karyo adjusted by Muradaka (total yields of a village)' was dependent on Kokudaka (a system for determining land value for tribute purposes in the Edo period) of the region when law enforcement would punish a particular region in total. Karyo was used as a penal punishment for minor crimes such as gambling and prostitution. In addition, as a general rule, the deadline for payment was within three days after receiving the order, and the obligated person was imposed a tegusari penalty (confinement to one's residence and restraint in behavior with handcuffs on the wrists) if the person did not pay a fine by the deadline. Furthermore, in some cases, Karyo was imposed with Tojime (house arrest, a punishment by nailing down a gate [or a front door]) to the person committed a crime. After the issuance of "Kujigata-osadamegaki," a number of the cases imposed double punishment, Karyo and another punishment, had been increased as a substitute for a prison sentence to make the old severe penal punishments less strict. In addition, Karyo was widely used for Hanpo (laws and regulations to govern a feudal domain during the Edo period) and for Muraho (laws and regulations to govern a village) through the Eedo period.
Karyo as a penal punishment (punishment by seizing assets) was abolished once by "Shinritsu Koryo" (Outline of the New Criminal Code) issued by the Meiji government in 1869 and changed to a penal fine system based on the Shokudo system of the old Ritsuryo law. However, the current Karyo which was a non-penal fine and departed from a petty fine was newly established by the old penal code issued in 1880.