Appeal against protective custody disposition and legality of a measure for rejection of pleading;

According to Articles 20(7) and 42 of the Social Protection Act, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the appeal procedure of a protective disposition may apply mutatis mutandis. Thus, there is no illegality in the dismissal of the first instance judgment without oral argument on the appeal of the above defendant and the requester for protective detention who meet the requirements of Article 364(5) of the same Act.

Articles 20(7) and 42 of the Social Protection Act; Article 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Doh-won

Gwangju High Court Decision 84No174,84No22 delivered on May 10, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The twenty-five days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the imprisonment.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the respondent for custody and defense counsel are examined.

Examining the facts of criminal records and evidence of the requester who is concurrently the defendant and the respondent who is concurrently the defendant at the time of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the court below recognized the criminal facts of the requester who is concurrently the defendant and the respondent who is concurrently the defendant in the court of first instance as an act of larceny and sentenced to punishment for habitual larceny as just and pursuant to Articles 20 (7) and 42 of the Social Protection Act, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the appeal procedure of a protective disposition can be applied mutatis mutandis. Thus, the court below's dismissal of the judgment of the court of first instance without oral argument on the ground that this case satisfies the requirements of Article 364 (5) of the same Act and this case satisfies the requirements of Article 364 (5) of the same Act, and there is no illegality such as the theory

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. In accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act and Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the number of days of pre-trial detention after the appeal is to be included in the imprisonment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating

Justices Kang Young-young (Presiding Justice)