The risk of recidivism as a protective custody requirement under Article 5 (2) 2 of the Social Protection Act requires a lack of possibility of recidivism only with the possibility of recidivism, and it is highly probable to repeat the crime. The judgment criteria are to be strictly determined by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as the age, family relation, academic background, occupation, motive, means, method and method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, existence of a similar criminal record (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 83Do385, Sept. 27, 1983). The original court maintains the first instance court's measure that judged that there is no evidence to determine the risk of recidivism against the requester under protective custody, taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the records, such as the criminal record of the requester under protective custody, the motive and circumstance of the crime in this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)