logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.04.27 2016구합80366
분류처우개선신청 거부처분 취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s rejection disposition against the Plaintiff on November 8, 2016 is revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 23, 2016, the Plaintiff was arrested on charges of violating the Korean Racing Association Act and was detained in the Seoul Detention Center on March 24, 2016.

The first head of the arrest warrant against the plaintiff is as follows.

The suspect, as a member of the wharf of the Jeju-do organization violence ship, provided C with money and valuables to the steering staff D, c, E, c, and c, etc. on the ground of his own horse as an agent, and provided money and valuables to the steering staff D, c, c, etc., and the number of the horses to enter the horse on purpose after the first and second landings.”

B. On March 24, 2016, the Defendant designated the Plaintiff as organized violent inmates pursuant to Article 198 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s arrest warrant against the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff was an organized violent offender.

C. Around July 26, 2016, the Plaintiff’s defense counsel requested the Seocho Police Station to verify the fact that the Plaintiff was not belonging to the guidance for organized violence in order to apply for the cancellation of the designation of organized violence inmates in the Seoul detention center. However, the Seocho Police Station did not confirm it.

On October 21, 2016, the sentence of one year and four months was finalized due to the violation of the Korean Racing Association Act against the Plaintiff. On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff was transferred to Daejeon Correctional Institution and was still detained in the Daejeon Correctional Institution, and is still designated as organized violence inmates.

E. On October 31, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition with the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission stating that the Plaintiff should not be classified as a organized violence group, and the Defendant responded to the following purport on November 8, 2016.

hereinafter referred to as "the answer of this case"

According to Article 198 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act, inmates specified as organized violence offenders in arrest warrant, detention warrant, indictment, or written judgment.

arrow