1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 11, 2003, the Plaintiff was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment with prison labor for robbery, injury, etc. and to a protective custody by the Gwangju District Court (2003Dahap124, 214, 303 (combined), 2003Ma4). The Plaintiff appealed against this and appealed, but the lower court was sentenced on March 18, 2014 (Seoul High Court 2003No687, 2003No203No28). However, on June 25, 2004, the lower judgment was finalized on the same day (Supreme Court 2004Do1964, 2004Do36).

B. The former Social Protection Act (amended by Act No. 5179, Dec. 12, 1996; hereinafter the same shall apply) was repealed by the Act repealed by Act No. 7656, Aug. 4, 2005, when the Plaintiff was serving in prison according to the above final judgment.

The Plaintiff completed the enforcement of the above sentence on April 9, 2013, but, pursuant to Article 2 of the Addenda of the repealed Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Addenda of this case”), was subject to protective custody in the three prisons of North Korean defectors from April 10, 2013.

C. On February 17, 2014, at around 19:30, the Plaintiff fighting with other prisoners, i.e., having been engaged in a horse dispute with C, other prisoners, and assaulted with each other, while interested in the dispute.

(hereinafter “instant violation”). D.

On February 17, 2014 through February 28, 2014, the Defendant investigated the Plaintiff on the instant violation. immediately after the instant violation, the Defendant used protective equipment (metallic protective equipment) from February 17, 2014 to 07:00 on the following day pursuant to Article 97 of the former Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act (amended by Act No. 13235, Mar. 27, 2015; hereinafter referred to as the “former Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act”) to separately accommodate the Plaintiff during the investigation period pursuant to Article 110 of the Punishment Execution Act, and limited some treatment, such as working, sports, participation in joint events, etc.

E. On February 28, 2014, the Defendant passed a resolution of the Disciplinary Committee.