According to the records, after an appellant was detained on May 18, 1998 due to a charge of rape and was prosecuted on June 12, 1998, the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for three years and six months from the Seoul District Court (98Gohap539) on November 5, 1998, and appealed from the Seoul High Court (98No3083) on March 17, 1999, acquitted the appellant on the charge of rape in the reason of the judgment. However, with respect to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, which is an ancillary charge added at the appellate court, a fine of 100,000 won and one day summons detention, and the judgment was finalized on March 25, 1998 and confirmed on March 25, 199; and it is evident that the appellant was released on March 19, 197 from the date of appeal to the date of detention under the above sentence of the High Court on March 3, 199.

2. Appellant’s assertion and judgment

A. The claimant's assertion

The claimant asserts that, due to the above criminal defendant case which was found not guilty on the grounds of the judgment, the defendant was detained for 203 days excluding 100 days included in the period of detention in the workhouse with respect to the above fine from May 18, 1998 to March 17, 199 (304, but based on the claimant's assertion), the State has a duty to pay the petitioner a criminal compensation amount of 6,852,265 won (3,75 wonx 203 days) calculated on the basis of 33,755 won per day wage of an urban ordinary person at the time when the above judgment became final and conclusive by the time when the judgment became final and conclusive.

B. Determination on the existence of criminal compensation claim

Article 1(1) of the Criminal Compensation Act provides that "When a person who has received a verdict of 'not guilty' in the general procedure, retrial or extraordinary appeal procedure under the Criminal Procedure Act, has been detained under this Act, he/she may claim compensation for the detention against the State in accordance with this Act, and its purport is that the person who has received a judgment of 'not guilty' may claim compensation for the detention of the State in cases where the person has been detained under detention until the judgment of 'not guilty' up to the trial. In addition, in cases where the judgment of 'not guilty' was rendered in the disposition of judgment, and in cases where the number of detention days is deemed necessary for the investigation and trial of the portion which was found not guilty in the judgment of 'not guilty', it shall be reasonable to allow the person to claim compensation for the pre-trial detention as in cases where the judgment of 'not guilty' was rendered in the disposition of judgment of 'not guilty'. According to the records, the claimant has the right to claim compensation for the portion

(c) Number of days of detention eligible for compensation;

In a case where a judgment of innocence was rendered on the grounds of the judgment, the number of days of pre-trial detention included in the period of imprisonment, imprisonment without prison labor, or a fine, among the whole days of pre-trial detention, shall be excluded from the period of pre-trial detention, and in a case where the remaining days of pre-trial detention, excluding this, can be deemed necessary for the investigation and examination of the part of the judgment of innocence, the whole compensation shall be paid. However, in the investigation and examination of the part of the judgment of conviction, if it can be deemed that the number of days of pre-trial detention included in the period of pre-trial detention was more necessary, criminal compensation should be

According to the records of this case, at the time of detention, the claimant made a confession as to the part of the facts charged in the previous conviction consistently after May 18, 1998 at the time of detention. With respect to the injury resulting from rape, most of the investigation and trial were concentrated on denying the crime, and the prosecutor added the facts charged to March 8, 199, but it was no longer necessary for a party member to hear the amendment of indictment after permitting the amendment of indictment on the 10th of the same month. Thus, in light of the above investigation and trial process, it is reasonable to view that the remaining number of days of pre-trial detention 204 days excluding 100 days of pre-trial detention in the period of detention in the Labor Station, which was included in the period of detention in the period of detention in the Labor Station, was necessary only for the investigation and trial on the part of the judgment of innocence. Thus, the claimant can receive criminal compensation on the 203 days of pre-trial detention.

(d) Determination of compensation amount;

Furthermore, considering all the circumstances stipulated in Article 4(2) of the Criminal Compensation Act, including the amount of compensation to be paid to the claimant, the type and period of detention recorded in the records, the degree of loss suffered during the period of detention, mental suffering, age of the claimant, occupation and living level, etc., it is clear that the compensation for the petitioner’s pre-trial detention should be calculated by calculating the amount of compensation to be paid to the claimant as KRW 33,755 per day, which is the minimum daily wage under the Minimum Wage Act of March 1999 where the cause for the claim for compensation occurred, within five times the number of days of detention for 203 days, which is the minimum daily wage under the Minimum Wage Act of 12,200, which is the minimum daily wage of 12,755 won, which is the sum of the amount to be paid to the claimant. Thus, it is apparent that the State’s compensation to the claimant is calculated as 6,852,265 won (3,755 wonx203 days).

Therefore, the claim of this case by the claimant is all reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Cho Nam-nam (Presiding Judge) Lee Ma-ho