Whether the provision on protective custody under Article 5 of the Social Protection Act violates the principle of res judicata (negative)

The provisions on protective custody under Article 5 of the Social Protection Act (Act No. 4089 of March 25, 1989) do not violate the constitutional provisions that set forth the principle of res judicata.

Article 5 of the Social Protection Act, Article 13(1) of the Constitution

[Plaintiff-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-do, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellee)

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Jeon Byung-hoon

Daegu High Court Decision 89No520, 89No44 delivered on December 20, 1989

All appeals are dismissed.

The thirty days, out of the days pending trial after appeal, shall be included in the principal sentence.

Defendant and Defendant Appellant and their state appointed defense counsel’s grounds of appeal are also examined.

According to the evidence adopted by the court of first instance maintained by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant's crime was committed in the judgment of the court of first instance, and there is no error of law by incomplete deliberation or rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and in light of the defendant's original trial record and the means, method and nature of the crime, the defendant is found to have habitualness of larceny, and further, if the defendant takes into account all the circumstances shown in the records such as these circumstances and the defendant's age, family relation, property level, time interval from the completion of the execution of the final sentence to the crime of this case, circumstances after the completion of the crime of this case, etc., the defendant is deemed to have a risk of repeating a crime of the same or similar kind of crime, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to

In addition, the provisions on protective custody under Article 5 of the Social Protection Act (Law No. 4089 of March 25, 1989) do not violate the constitutional provisions that set forth the principle of res judicata.

All arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals by the defendant and the requester for detention are dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yoon So-young (Presiding Justice)