In determining the requirements for care and custody under Article 5 (1) 1 of the Social Protection Act, it is necessary to examine and determine whether the risk of recidivism exists.

In light of the purpose of Article 1 of the Social Protection Act, the requirements for the care and custody under Article 5 (1) 1 of the same Act are naturally deemed to be cases where there is a risk of re-offending, so it is not necessary to examine and determine the risk of re-offending.

Article 5 of Social Protection Act

An applicant for concurrent Office of the Defendant

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Shin Jin-chul

Seoul High Court Decision 83No597, 83No120 decided June 1, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the imprisonment concerned.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the respondent for defense (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") and his defense counsel are examined.

Examining the evidence in comparison with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the court below recognized the criminal facts of special larceny against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, and found the criminal facts of this case in light of the facts and the means, method, etc. of the crime of this case to be justified, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misunderstanding the legal principles of habitualness. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, measures taken by the defendant against protective custody for 10 years are legitimate, and measures taken against the defendant's act constitutes the protective custody requirement under Article 5 (1) 1 of the Social Protection Act are just, and the protective custody requirement under Article 5 of the above Act is naturally a case where the risk of recidivism exists in light of the purport of Article 1 of the above Act. Thus, it is not necessary to examine and determine the new danger of recidivism. The defendant's previous conviction's application under Article 81 of the Criminal Act for the criminal facts of this case more than 2 times prior to March 3, 1965.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. In accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act and Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, 30 days of detention after the appeal shall be included in the imprisonment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)