1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 12, 2001, the Plaintiff was sentenced by the Seoul High Court to imprisonment for life for the crime of continuing murder, and was under confinement in the Daegu Prison from March 18, 2002 after the judgment became final and conclusive.

B. On April 15, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Plaintiff two sets, one set of learning, and one set (hereinafter “instant goods”). The Defendant returned the instant goods in accordance with the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act (hereinafter “Punishment Execution Act”) and relevant laws and regulations, and notified the Plaintiff of the fact.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) the Defendant’s prohibition of the entry of the instant goods, which had no “constition to undermine the security and order of correctional institutions,” was an abuse of discretion.

The disposition of this case is against the excessive prohibition principle, due process principle, and is unlawful by infringing the plaintiff's right to pursue happiness and property rights.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Determination 1) The Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act (hereinafter “Punishment Execution Act”)

Article 26 sets the limit on the possession of goods by prisoners and delegates the scope of the possession of the goods to the Minister of Justice (Article 26(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act). In addition, in cases where a person other than prisoners applies for the provision of money and valuables to prisoners, a warden shall permit the issuance of money and valuables in the absence of grounds falling under “when it is likely to harm the edification of prisoners or their sound rehabilitation into society” or “when it is likely to harm the safety or order of facilities” (Article 27(1) of the same Act). Article 27(1) of the same Act provides for necessary matters concerning the scope of permission, etc. of such money and valuables to the Minister of Justice (Article 42 of the Enforcement Decree