2016doz. 27 (Joint Medical Treatment and Custody)

2016 Doz. 113 (Joint Attachment Orders)

A person shall be appointed.

Attorneys AI-J, AK, AK, AL, AM, N, AO, AP, AP, Q, AR, and AS

2015No35 (Joint Judgment) Judgment

1. The defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant")

As to the Grounds of Appeal

(1) As to the medical treatment and custody claim

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court is as stated in its reasoning.

for the reasons stated in the facts charged, the defendant was killed out of the 3rd rail of the 3th floor.

The judgment below is justifiable. Contrary to the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

There is no error beyond the limit of this section.

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court is as stated in its reasoning.

for the reason that the defendant is likely to repeat a crime and needs to receive medical treatment at the medical treatment and custody facility

The first instance judgment dismissing a request for medical treatment and custody based on the recognition of gender is reversed, and the defendant is also accused.

It is justifiable for medical treatment and custody to be put under medical treatment and custody. Contrary to logical and empirical rules, free evaluation of evidence

legal principles on the requirements for medical treatment and custody or the purport of Article 4(2) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act;

There was no misunderstanding error.

(2) As to the defendant's case and the case of claim for attachment order

The defendant filed a final appeal regarding the defendant's case and the case for which an attachment order is requested, but the grounds for the final appeal

There is no entry in the appellate brief and there is no entry in the grounds for objection.

2. As to the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal

(1) As to the accused case

Examining the record, the lower court’s judgment, based on its reasoning, found the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime.

It is justifiable to determine that there was a state of mental disorder. Contrary to logical and empirical rules, the law above is against law.

On the contrary, there was no error by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental disorder.

(2) As to the claim for attachment order

Upon examining records, the court below's decision is based on medical treatment and custody by the defendant for the reasons stated in its decision.

It is difficult to conclude that it is highly probable to commit murder even after the completion of medical treatment.

It is justifiable that the attachment order of an electronic device contains a misapprehension of the legal principle as to the risk of recidivism.

No error was found.

(3) As to the medical treatment and custody claim

A prosecutor filed an appeal on a medical treatment and custody claim, but does not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal.

There is no statement in the appellate brief on the grounds of objection.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

this decision is delivered.

Justices Kim Jae-tae

Justices Jo Hee-de

Justices Park Sang-ok