This paper has clarified the theoretical base of the legality of indictment for a part of a crime and reviewed limitations of the indictment. In addition, the legality on the indictment for a part of a crime as a crime requiring a complaint from the victim for indictment has been reviewed. As a result, the following conclusion has been obtained: First, because adversarial system, indictable discretion and a public prosecutor`s monopolization of indictment are applied under current criminal law, it is reasonable to say that the indictment for a part of a crime should be permitted. However, the object of lawsuit needs to be set regardless of the adversarial system. Second, in terms of the limitation of partial indictment of a crime, whether or not the crime can be separated as a minimum unit unlike the general and discretional issues such as right abuse arraignment matters. Therefore, whether or not the partial indictment of a crime could be permitted is a matter of the theories of counting crime. Third, even though it is just a part of a crime under substantial law, a partial crime is still admitted as a crime. Therefore, a partial crime is seen as an independent crime. Hence, the logical limitation in compositing arraignment lies in ``one crime`` under substantial law. At the same time, ``one crime`` is just ``a crime in consciousness.`` A crime in assessment is not applied here. After all, provided that a crime can be separated as ``minimum unit`` which cannot be divided anymore, it could be admitted as an independent indictment. If it is assumed that an independent indictment cannot be composed when a crime cannot be separated as a minimum unit, it can be said that the entire of one crime as well as a part of it was indicted.