Whether a sentence before the enforcement of the Social Protection Act violates the protective custody disposition for criminal offenders and the principle of no punishment without the law and the principle of no punishment without the law (negative)

Even if the record of the respondent who was sentenced at least three times for the same or similar crime under the former part of Article 5 (1) 1 of the Social Protection Act committed the crime of this case corresponding to the same or similar crime in the latter part of the same Act before the enforcement of the same Act, since the crime of this case is committed after the enforcement of the same Act, the respondent for protective custody becomes a person subject to protective custody under the same Act, and the same act is not in violation of the principle of no punishment without the law or the constitutional provision that provides the principle

Article 5(1) of the Social Protection Act, Article 2 of the Social Protection Act, Article 12 of the Constitution

Supreme Court Decision 82Do1313, 82Ga262 delivered on July 13, 1982, 82Do2196, 82Do244 delivered on October 26, 1982

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Park Do-hwan

Daegu High Court Decision 83No861, 83No198 delivered on August 12, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The period of detention pending trial after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence for twenty days.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are examined.

Even if the record of the respondent who was sentenced three or more times for the same or a similar crime under the former part of Article 5(1)1 of the Social Protection Act, committed the crime of this case corresponding to the same or a similar crime in the latter part of the Act, even if the crime of this case is committed after the unlawful enforcement of the law, the respondent for the warrant of this case shall be subject to protective custody under the same Act, and the above Act shall not be in violation of the principle of no punishment without the law or violation of the constitutional provision that provides for the principle of no punishment without the law. In addition, in this case where the sentence of imprisonment for less than 10 years is sentenced, an unreasonable sentencing cannot be

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal is included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)