司法院於2006年12月宣佈要採行新的司法制度，其中包括採行起訴狀一本主義與改善上訴程序。然起訴狀一本主義是否是一道改善現行制度的良藥？倘若採行其與目前體制可能產生的衝突為何？此等問題均有賴待司法界與全國與論大量參與及討論。因此，本文先介紹日本的起訴狀一本主義與美國的證據開示制度，並先釐清兩者的主要區別，繼之介紹美國的證據開示制度，與其制度運用的現行問題；其次是假設我國要採用該證據開示制度，那們指出我國現行體制下所可能面臨必須調整的問題，例如國家正義性格與文化價值的取決、程序浪費、法官工作量、開示範圍的確定標準、與起訴審查制度的矛盾等問題，文末，並擇要指出日本採取起訴狀一本主義，與中國大陸採行折衷式證據開示制度所產生的問題，來作為新制度安排的參考。 The Judicial Yuan of the Republic of China announced new plans to reform Taiwan's criminal prosecution procedure, with the aim of establishing a prosecution system that protects the people's rights and suits the current status of Taiwan's judiciary. These plans include the future adoption of the indictment-only doctrine and a change in the current criminal appeal process. But, could the adoption of the indictment-only doctrine be a perfect prescription to cure the lack of self-confidence of current status of Taiwan’s judiciary? Isn’t there any potential problem once further adapting the new system? All of these need the hearing and further discussion of the public. The main issue of the first part introduces the indictment-only doctrine of the Japan’s legal system, and the discovery procedure of American legal system. Part 2 below discusses the potential conflict between embracing the new system and intransigence of traditional ideology, such as the traditional goal of the justice, overloaded procedure, the average caseload of Judge, the unidentifiable standard of the limitation of the discovery, and the prosecution examination of the civil law system. With the emphasis on the comparative legal system and the potential problem might encounter in the future, part 3 presents the current situation of judicial difficulties of Japan and the Mainland China improved legal system had faced ,and tries to allow Taiwan lawmaker prevent or avoid these before embedding the new legal reformation.