Risk of recidivism by a person who has committed an identical crime 66 times during the period of probation;

In light of the fact that the defendant committed the larceny of similar veterinary act more than 66 times during the period of the suspension of the two-year probation period for the defendant's imprisonment with prison labor in 8 months, it is deemed that there is a risk of recidivism in light of the criminal behaviors, criminal records, and the habition of the larceny as shown in this case.

Article 5 (2) of the Social Protection Act

Applicant for Custody

Applicant for Custody

Attorney Shin Shin-soo

Seoul High Court Decision 83No1423,83No294 Decided July 29, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the public defender are examined together.

In comparison with the records of the judgment of the court below and the court of first instance, if the trial records are examined, the court below recognized that the defendant had a habit of larceny in light of the fact that the defendant committed the larceny under the law similar to the law in the court of first instance again over 66 times during the period of the suspension of the execution of 2 years in the night 8-year period of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, and that the defendant committed the larceny repeatedly over 6 times during the suspension of 2 years, and that there is a risk of recidivism in light of the criminal records and criminal records of the defendant, and the recidivism committed the habitual offense, and therefore, it is just to take measures against the protective custody for 7 years under Article 5 (2) 2 of the Social Protection Act. There is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles

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

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)