1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 12, 2001, the Plaintiff was sentenced by the Seoul High Court to imprisonment for life for the crime of continuing murder, and was under confinement in the Daegu Prison from March 18, 2002 after the judgment became final and conclusive.

On July 21, 2016, the Plaintiff avoided disturbance from 2 dong-2 dong-10, and interfered with the peaceful prison life of other prisoners.

- At around 10:00 on July 22, 2016, the plaintiff was found to possess goods received from the above ward without permission.

B. On July 29, 2016, following a resolution of the Disciplinary Committee, the Defendant issued a disciplinary measure against the Plaintiff on July 29, 2016 under Article 109(2)1 of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act (hereinafter “Punishment Execution Act”) and Article 214 Subparag. 14, 15, and Article 215 Subparag. 3 (a) and subparagraph 4 (a) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act with respect to the disciplinary measure “18 days of forfeiture.”

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【The ground for recognition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s No. 1 to 3, Gap’s No. 1 and No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Defendant failed to provide a new inmate education even after the lapse of 10 days from the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff had moved to the confinement room for a long-term developer, resulting in the instant violation. Nevertheless, the Defendant’s disposition of 18 days of grace against the Plaintiff is unlawful, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is sought nullification.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. The Plaintiff, at around 16:00 on July 21, 2016, was arguing that B (the prisoner number C) was in a ward at around 10, the lower 200-dong 200, the lower 300,000, and the Plaintiff said D (the prisoner number E means that “the Plaintiff is a talker with many other people in a ward,” and the Plaintiff is one of his employees and litigation.

No employees shall be upsee.

p.m.