Habitualness and risk of recidivism

Since habitual sexual intercourse refers to a habitor of a criminal who repeatedly commits a crime, one of the criteria for recognizing the risk of repeating a crime under the Social Protection Act is possible, but it does not mean the possibility that a person in need of protection may commit a crime in the future, i.e., the risk of repeating a crime, and thus, it cannot be said that there is a risk of repeating a crime just because

Article 5 (2) of the Social Protection Act

Applicant for Custody

Prosecutor

Attorney Shin Chang-dong

Seoul High Court Decision 82No347 delivered on September 17, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the prosecutor's grounds of appeal.

Since habitual sexual intercourse refers to a habitor of a criminal who repeatedly commits a crime, one of the criteria for recognizing the risk of repeating a crime under the Social Protection Act can be determined. However, it cannot be determined that a person subject to protection is not likely to commit a crime in the future, i.e., the risk of repeating a crime. Therefore, the court below's decision that the risk of repeating a crime does not constitute a violation of logical rules or an misunderstanding of legal principles on the ground that the court below acknowledged the habitual nature of the crime committed by the person subject to protective detention and did not recognize the risk of repeating a crime. Thus, it is just that the court below's decision that the person subject to protective detention does not recognize the risk of repeating a crime by taking into account various circumstances such as the age, health condition, motive of the crime, period of the crime committed before and after the release, and the records of the crime

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

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)