Intuitive Derivation
Clearly, if $x \geq 1$, then $P(X < x | Z) = 1$ no matter what the observed value of $Z$ is.
If $0 \leq x < 1$ and suppose we have observed $Z = z$. Intuitively, it holds that (this actually has a theoretical support too: see Problem 33.16 in Probability and Measure (3rd ed.) by Patrick Billingsley):
\begin{align*}
P(X < x | Z = z) &= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} P(X < x | z - h < Z \leq z + h) \\
&= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} P(X < x | (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X) \\
&= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} \frac{P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)}{P((z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)}. \tag{$\star$}\label{star}
\end{align*}
Case 1:
If $0 < z < 1$, then for sufficiently small $h$, $0 < z - h < z + h < 1$, thus the probability $P((z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)$ is the area of the region (draw a picture)
\begin{align*}
\{(u, v): 0 < u < 1, (z - h)u < v \leq (z + h)u\},
\end{align*}
which is $\frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h) - (z - h)] \times 1 = h$.
Similarly, the probability $P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)$ is the area of the region
\begin{align*}
\{(u, v): 0 < u < x, (z - h)u < v \leq (z + h)u\},
\end{align*}
which is $\frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h)x - (z - h)x] \times x = hx^2$. It thus follows by $\eqref{star}$ that
\begin{align*}
P(X < x | Z = z) = \lim_{h \to 0}\frac{hx^2}{h} = x^2.
\end{align*}
Case 2:
If $z > 1$, this case is slightly more involved than Case 1, as $\eqref{star}$ depends on the order of $x$ and $z^{-1}$. While the probability of $P((z - h)X < Y < (z + h)X)$ is always (again, draw the picture)
\begin{align*}
& \operatorname{Area}(S_1) := \operatorname{Area}(\{(u, v): (z + h)^{-1}v < u < (z - h)^{-1}v, 0 < v < 1\}) \\
=& \frac{1}{2} \times \left(\frac{1}{z - h} - \frac{1}{z + h}\right) \times 1 = \frac{h}{z^2 - h^2},
\end{align*}
the shape of the region $\{(u, v): 0 < u < x\} \cap S_1$ is different depending on whether $x \leq z^{-1}$ or $x > z^{-1}$. One can verify that
\begin{align*}
& P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X) \\
=& \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h)x - (z - h)x] \times x = hx^2 & x < z^{-1}, \\
\frac{1}{2} \times \left(\frac{1}{z - h} - \frac{1}{z + h}\right) \times 1 = \frac{h}{z^2 - h^2} & x \geq z^{-1}.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
It thus follows by $\eqref{star}$ that
\begin{align*}
P(X < x | Z = z) =
\begin{cases}
\lim_{h \downarrow 0}\frac{hx^2}{\frac{h}{z^2 - h^2}} = x^2z^2 & x < z^{-1} \\
1 & x \geq z^{-1}
\end{cases} = \min(x^2z^2, 1).
\end{align*}
In summary, Case 1 and Case 2 show that
\begin{align*}
P(X < x | Z) = \min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(Z) + \min(x^2Z^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(Z). \tag{$\dagger$}\label{dagger}
\end{align*}
Rigorous Proof
Now we verify $\eqref{dagger}$ by checking it satisfies the two defining properties of conditional probability:
- $P(X < x |Z)$ is measurable $\sigma(Z)$.
- For any $G \in \sigma(Z)$, $\int_G P(X < x | Z)dP = P(G \cap \{X < x\})$.
Bullet point 1 is obvious in view of $\eqref{dagger}$ is a function of $Z$. To verify bullet point 2, we need to show for any $z \in (0, +\infty)$,
\begin{align*}
\int\limits_{Z \leq z}\left[\min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(Z) + \min(x^2Z^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(Z)\right]dP = P(X \leq x, Z \leq z).
\end{align*}
Or equivalently,
\begin{align*}
\int_0^z\left[\min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(t) + \min(x^2t^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(t)\right]f_Z(t)dt = P(X \leq x, Z \leq z), \tag{0}\label{0}
\end{align*}
where $f_Z$ denotes the density of $Z = \frac{Y}{X}$. By the independence of $X$ and $Y$, the distribution function of $Z$ is
\begin{align*}
F_Z(z) = P(Y \leq zX) = \int_0^1P(Y \leq zx)dx. \tag{1}\label{1}
\end{align*}
If $z > 1$, the integral in $\eqref{1}$ is
\begin{align*}
& \int_0^{z^{-1}}P(Y \leq zx)dx + \int_{z^{-1}}^1P(Y \leq zx)dx \\
=& \int_0^{z^{-1}}zxdx + \int_{z^{-1}}^11dx = \frac{1}{2z} + 1 - \frac{1}{z} = 1 - \frac{1}{2z}. \tag{2}\label{2}
\end{align*}
If $z \leq 1$, the integral in $\eqref{1}$ is
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 zx dx = \frac{1}{2}z. \tag{3}\label{3}
\end{align*}
$\eqref{2}$ and $\eqref{3}$ thus imply the density of $Z$ is given by
\begin{align*}
f_Z(z) = \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2} & z \leq 1, \\
\frac{1}{2}z^{-2} & z > 1.
\end{cases} \tag{4}\label{4}
\end{align*}
When $z \leq 1$, it follows by $\eqref{4}$ that the left hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is
\begin{align*}
\int_0^z \min(x^2, 1)\frac{1}{2}dt = \frac{1}{2}\min(x^2, 1)z,
\end{align*}
while the right hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is
\begin{align*}
P(X \leq x, Y \leq Xz) = \int_0^1 P(t \leq x, Y \leq tz)dt = \frac{1}{2}z\min(x^2, 1).
\end{align*}
Hence $\eqref{0}$ holds.
When $z > 1$, it follows by $\eqref{4}$ that the left hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is
\begin{align*}
& \int_0^1 \min(x^2, 1)\frac{1}{2}dt + \int_1^z \min(x^2t^2, 1)
\frac{1}{2}t^{-2}dt \\
=& \frac{1}{2}\min(x^2, 1) + \frac{1}{2}\int_1^z \min(x^2, t^{-2})dt \\
=& \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2}zx^2 & x \leq z^{-1}, \\
x - \frac{1}{2z} & z^{-1} < x < 1, \\
1 - \frac{1}{2z} & x \geq 1,
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
while the right hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is
\begin{align*}
& P(X \leq x, Y \leq Xz) = \int_0^1 P(t \leq x, Y \leq tz)dt \\
=& \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2}zx^2 & x \leq z^{-1}, \\
x - \frac{1}{2z} & z^{-1} < x < 1, \\
1 - \frac{1}{2z} & x \geq 1.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
Hence $\eqref{0}$ holds. This completes the proof.
[self-study]
tag and read its wiki. $\endgroup$