beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2018.11.30 2018누3784

위치추적기대상자지정처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is based on the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance.

C.1) Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act provide that “A prison officer may keep safe guard of prisoners or facilities using electronic equipment to the extent necessary to prevent suicide, self-harm, violence, and other acts harmful to prisoners’ safety or order.” Article 165 of the Enforcement Rule of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “A prison officer may keep safe guard of prisoners or facilities using electronic equipment to the extent that it is necessary to protect prisoners from danger and injury or harm of prisoners’ life or harm of facilities.” Article 165 of the Enforcement Rule of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “In cases where prisoners are kept safe guard of prisoners outside of a correctional institution due to hospitalization, transfer of prisoners, or other reasons, a prison officer may place restrictions on prisoners’ fundamental rights such as protective equipment or electronic warning of prisoners to the extent that it is inevitable for prisoners to use them.”