1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for the crime of uttering of forged securities, etc. and the sentence became final and conclusive. From September 3, 2012 to February 19, 2013, the Plaintiff was detained in the Tong-young Detention House, and from February 19, 2013 to June 28, 2013, and was released on parole.

B. According to Article 48(1) of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act (hereinafter “The Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act”), the television viewing of prisoners ought to be limited for the purpose of acquisition of culture, but the head of the Tong/L and the head of the Jin prison, who is a public official belonging to the Defendant, forced the Plaintiff to view the television broadcast program that is entirely irrelevant to the accommodation life and acquisition of culture from 09:00 to 21:00.

C. According to Article 6(2) of the Execution of Punishment Act, a ward in a correctional institution should be equipped with adequate space and facilities for lighting, ventilation, and heating so that prisoners can lead a healthy life. However, the defendant did not properly install heating systems, such as that the defendant did not install heating systems themselves in the common accommodation ward in the Jinju Prison where the plaintiff was admitted.

Since the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental pain due to the above defendant's tort, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 5,000,000 and delay damages to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 2 (1) of the State Compensation Act.

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion that forced a television viewing irrelevant to the acquisition of culture was forced, and ① Article 48(1) of the Punishment Execution Act provides that a television viewing is a prisoner’s right. If the inmates of a prison, detention house, and a prison do not want, they appear to have been led to the television installed in the ward. Thus, the Plaintiff’s life in the ward where the television was frighted is forced by the Defendant.