Protective custody disposition for criminal offenders prior to the enforcement of the Social Protection Act and violation of the principle of no punishment without the law and the principle of no punishment without the law.

Even if the record of the respondent who was sentenced two or more times for the same or a similar crime under Article 5 (2) 1 of the Social Protection Act committed the crime of this case corresponding to the same or a similar crime under the latter part of the above Act before the enforcement of the above Act, as long as the crime of this case is included after the enforcement of the above Act, the respondent for protective custody shall be subject to the protective custody disposition under the same Act, and it shall not be deemed that the above Act violates the principle of no punishment without the law or violates the constitutional provision

Article 5(2) of the Social Protection Act, Article 11 of the Constitution, and Article 12 of the Constitution

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

An applicant for concurrent Office of the Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-soo

Daegu High Court Decision 83No1205, 83No282 delivered on November 18, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

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

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

Even if the record of the respondent who was sentenced two or more times for the same or a similar crime under Article 5 (2) 1 of the Social Protection Act committed the crime of this case corresponding to the same or a similar crime under the latter part of the above Act before the enforcement of the above Act, as long as the crime of this case is included after the enforcement of the above Act, the respondent for the protective custody becomes a person subject to the protective custody disposition under the same Act, and it shall not be deemed that the above Act violates the principle of no punishment without the law, or violates the

In addition, in this case where a sentence of less than 10 years of imprisonment cannot be considered as the grounds of appeal for unfair sentencing, all the arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal is to be 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)