logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.09.30 2016나43978
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 6, 2015, while the Plaintiff was sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment for murder and was serving in the Busan Correctional Institution, the Plaintiff was detained in the ward for investigation by demanding solitary confinement and refusing to enter the room.

원고는 2015. 10. 8. 16:30경 다른 수용자와 혼거생활을 할 수 없다는 이유로 조사거실 전실 요청을 하였는데 이를 거부당하자 불만을 품고 조사거실 출입문을 발로 3회 걷어찼다.

B. The head of the Busan Correctional Institution used metal protection units to the Plaintiff from around 16:45 on October 8, 2015 to October 10, 2015 on the ground that the Plaintiff could commit suicide or self-harm due to unstable trial conditions.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion stated that the health condition is very bad when providing a correctional officer’s counseling around September 25, 2015 and around October 8, 2015, such circumstance was not considered in light of the use of protective equipment. While the Plaintiff wearing protective equipment, the medical examination by a medical officer was not conducted.

Since this constitutes a tort in violation of the Administration and Treatment of Prisoners Act (hereinafter “Punishment Execution Act”), the Defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 1,000 and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. According to Article 97(2) of the Execution of Punishment Act as to whether a person violates Article 97(2) of the same Act, when using protective equipment, the relevant prisoner’s age, health status, attitude of prison life should be considered.

According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments of the evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 7-1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 1 and 7-2, the Plaintiff voluntarily refused health examinations conducted on May 26, 2014 and May 19, 2015.

arrow