1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant (the appointed party) and the appointed party B is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who served in C prison from August 7, 2018 to October 5, 2018, whose sentence of imprisonment of nine years has become final and conclusive due to a special robbery.

B. The Defendant (Appointed Party) manages and operates a correctional institution and supervises its competent correctional officials to secure the custody of prisoners, to perform their duties, such as correction and edification.

(c)

The designated person B is a correctional public official belonging to the C prison, who has been in charge of transmission in the security and grievance handling.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over recognition, Eul 1-1, 2, 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In accordance with Article 2 of the State Compensation Act and Article 756 of the Civil Act, Defendant (Appointed Party) shall be liable for damages against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act, and Article 750 of the Civil Act.

Accordingly, the plaintiff seeks monetary payment like the purport of the claim.

A. C. The director illegally examined the Plaintiff’s correspondence, and designated the Plaintiff as the object of censorship (hereinafter “instant assertion”). B. The Plaintiff prepared a complaint of administrative litigation (hereinafter “instant administrative litigation”) against the director of C. C. C., seeking revocation of the censorship, etc. of the said correspondence, etc. (hereinafter “instant complaint”), and submitted it to the correctional officer affiliated with C. C. on September 17, 2018. The correctional officer affiliated with C. C sent the said document to the correctional officer affiliated with C. on September 19, 2018 (hereinafter “claim”). C.

On September 18, 2018, the warden conducted a retaliationary cell inspection against the plaintiff (hereinafter “III assertion”). D.

C Correctional officials, who forced or threatened the Plaintiff, forced the Plaintiff to withdraw the complaint against the Minister of Justice, to withdraw the petition submitted to the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, and to withdraw the administrative litigation of this case (hereinafter “No.4 allegation”). E. D. Correction Officials D, who belong to the correctional institution, were returned from the Gwangju District Court’s interest support (hereinafter “the head of interest support”).