Our Criminal Law has been amended for several times after we adopted foreign criminal law. Among those amendments, the most significant and vastest one is the amendment of those provisions about complicity. Among those provisions governing complicity, the most contradictory issue is the controversy between the independence and subordinate of complicity. In other words, no doubt the New Temporary Criminal Law (1912-1928), which adopted Chin Temporary Criminal Law, and the old Criminal Law (1928-1935) provided that complicity is subordinate. In addition, from the reason of the amendment, it is persuasive to conclude that the pre-amended Criminal Law (1935-2006) asserted complicity is dependent from offenders. However, courts and scholars interpreted those provisions of complicity in different ways. Especially some commentators, who are under the influence of Germany Criminal Law and the subordinate of complicity, contend that the pre-amended Criminal Law provided that complicity is subordinate. That cont ent results in the misunderstanding and confuse of the complicity law. In order to solve this problem, the new Criminal Law (enacted in January 2005 and effective in July 2006) clearly provides that complicity is subordinate. Nevertheless, those provisions are similar with Japanese Criminal Law, rather than Germany one so some scholars fiercely criticize those provisions. In order to point out those core issues, this article illustrate and discuss different complicity law, the theory of independence of complicity, the theory of subordinate of complicity, subordinate of process, and the ordinate of elements.