징벌처분무효
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. Since the Plaintiff was admitted to the Seoul detention center on April 27, 2012, the Plaintiff is currently confined in the previous correctional institution via the Red Prison.
B. On March 21, 2019, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of not complying with correctional officers’ official instructions or orders without justifiable grounds (Article 107 Subparag. 6 of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act; Article 214 Subparag. 14 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act; (b) refusing to enter a designated ward, etc. (Article 107 Subparag. 6 of the same Act; Article 214 Subparag. 17 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act); (c) committed an act of not complying with correctional officers’ official instructions or orders (Article 107 Subparag. 6 of the same Act; Article 214 Subparag. 17 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act); and (d) demanded disciplinary resolution against the Plaintiff.
C. On March 21, 2019, the Hong Prison Disciplinary Committee decided 15 days of forfeiture on the ground that the ground for the above disciplinary request was recognized. On the same day, the Defendant issued a disciplinary measure (hereinafter “instant measure”) against the Plaintiff for 15 days (including the period of investigation, including the period of 10 days: from March 12, 2019 to March 26, 2019) in accordance with the resolution of the Hong Prison Disciplinary Committee.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant disposition is null and void for the following reasons.
The plaintiff asserted the first time against the continued personal solicitation (influence, coercion, threat, etc.) of the worker in charge, the plaintiff only appealed to other prisoners on one occasion, "whether it would be possible to take disciplinary action if he/she is inside the undesignated," and it substantially interfere with the peaceful prison life of other prisoners by raising a large volume of sound or dissatising it.
No person shall be deemed to have failed to comply with a correctional officer's official order or order without justifiable grounds, such as refusing to enter or leave a designated ward.
B. On March 11, 2019, the Plaintiff asserted No. 2 was other prisoners.