logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1983. 7. 12. 선고 83감도114 판결
[보호감호·폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반][공1983.9.1.(711),1217]
Main Issues

Whether statutory mitigation or discretionary mitigation can be granted in determining the period of protective custody disposition (negative)

Summary of Judgment

Since protective custody disposition under the Social Protection Act cannot be considered as a punishment, the provisions of the Criminal Code are not applicable to statutory mitigation or discretionary mitigation.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 5 of the Social Protection Act, Articles 53 and 55 of the Criminal Act

Applicant for Custody

Applicant for Custody

upper and high-ranking persons

Applicant for Custody

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 82No1553, 82No379 delivered on February 9, 1983

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the requester for custody are examined.

In full view of the evidence at the time of the judgment of the court below and the court of first instance, it is sufficient to recognize the custody case against the defendant, and there is no reason to discuss that there was a violation of the law or a mistake of the facts about the risk of re-offending. Moreover, the protective custody disposition under the Social Protection Act cannot be viewed as a punishment, and therefore, the provision of statutory mitigation or discretionary mitigation is not applicable to the criminal law, and therefore, it is not reasonable to discuss this case’

Therefore, the appeal by the appellant is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)

arrow