檢察官將起訴書送交法院之時，發生訴訟繫屬關係，訴訟結構之三面關係即告確定，在訴訟法上即發生一定之效果，對法院形成訴訟拘束，法院必對其為一定之裁判，而使該案件之訴訟繫屬解消，不得置之不理。當檢察官到法庭實行公訴時以言詞或提出「補充理由書」或「論告書」，就起訴書所起訴之犯罪事實限縮為某一部，或擴張某一部分之事實，此即涉及法院審判與檢察官起訴範圍之確認，亦是直指有關檢察官實行公訴時之訴訟行為，如追加起訴、撤回起訴、更正起訴之行使程式與效力問題，在我國學說及實務對起訴及審判範圍之焦點大抵集中在案件單一性與同一性問題上，對於因起訴範圍效力所衍生之追加起訴、撤回起訴之論述卻不多見，而更正起訴之探討則多以變更起訴法條之範疇為論述。有關追加起訴固然是屬於檢察官實行公訴的職權行使，但為使審判活動的順利進行，確保訴訟程序的公正合法與被告合法訴訟權的保障，對檢察官提起追加起訴，自不得妨害被告辯護權行使、不得損害被告合法訴訟權，當有對檢察官追加起訴的行使，應有如上之時間上、程序上、事由上的適當限制，為釐清檢察官起訴範圍之效力，本文乃分析有關追加起訴提起與法院審理裁判問題。

When the public prosecutor file a charge to a court, there is a case at trial, and the adversary of the trial begins with the charge which requires the court to close the case. The public prosecutor goes to trial with the supplement in written or orally to expand or limit the charge filed already, which requires the court to confirm the scope of the charge. The practice of this aspect has long focused on the so-called principles of unitary and identity instead of addressing the said issues. To clarify issues of the supplement to prosecution, this study analyzes issues relating to the supplement to the prosecution and the scope of trial by properly limiting the power to supplement to prosecution to protect the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial.