beta
Main Issues
The case holding that there is no risk of recidivism
Summary of Judgment
Since the applicant was finally released from prison for four years and three months until the crime of this case was committed, when the son was faced with serious economic difficulties as he was disposed of to prepare medical treatment expenses, so he/she was faced with the crime of this case in order to prepare the living expenses of his/her family members, it cannot be concluded that the applicant for the cryption had a risk of recidivism even if the applicant for the cryption had three times more for the cryption.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 5 (2) of the Social Protection Act
Applicant for Custody
Applicant for Custody
upper and high-ranking persons
Prosecutor
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 87No1582, 87No147 decided July 21, 1987
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
For that reason, the court below acknowledged the facts leading to the crime of this case at the end of July 23, 1982 in light of the above recognition and living attitude after being released from the prison and the motive of the crime of this case, even though the respondent for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the crime of this case, the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant for the defendant.
Therefore, the appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Jin-Post (Presiding Justice)