Case: Pending KimiJungUn v. Ministry of Justice

[Anthony_org]

KimiJungUn​

v.

Ministry of Justice of Azalea Isles​

---

INTRODUCTION​

1. This civil action is brought by KimiJungUn (“Plaintiff”) against the Ministry of Justice of Azalea Isles (“Defendant”) to challenge an improper and unlawful criminal charge of Bank Robbery, filed under Indictment #212.
2. The charge, as filed, fails to satisfy the legal elements required to constitute Bank Robbery under Azalea Isles law and is therefore invalid, unconstitutional, and an abuse of prosecutorial authority.
3. The Ministry of Justice relied on mere presence inside a bank and a generalized system alert, explicitly stating the suspect may not even be inside the vault, to justify a charge of Bank Robbery, defined under Azalea Isles law as “the unlawful taking of money, securities, or other valuables from a bank or financial institution, through the use of force, intimidation, or threats of harm”, despite no evidence of the Plaintiff taking any money or even being inside the vault.

---

PARTIES​

1. Plaintiff : KimiJungUn
2. Defendant : Ministry of Justice

---

STATEMENT OF FACTS​

1. On or about the relevant date, the Ministry of Justice filed a criminal charge against Plaintiff for Bank Robbery, carrying a potential penalty of 10 minutes jail time and a $500 fine.
2. The charging summary states only: “Kim robbed the bank.”
3. The official system alert submitted as evidence states that suspects include all players in the bank unless invisible, and expressly clarifies that this does not mean the suspect is inside the vault.
4. The charge contains no allegation of stolen property, no identification of losses, and no reference to restitution, despite restitution being an assumed consequence of a completed offense.

---

RELEVANT LAW​

1. Bank Robbery is defined as:
   

   “The unlawful taking of money, securities, or other valuables from a bank or financial institution, through the use of force, intimidation, or threats of harm.”

2. The statutory punishment framework presumes:
   • A completed unlawful taking; and
   • Identifiable stolen property subject to restitution.

---

CAUSES OF ACTION​

Count I – Failure to State a Charge Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted​

1. Mere presence inside or near a bank does not satisfy the statutory definition of Bank Robbery.
2. The charge is legally defective on its face.

---

Count II – Unlawful Government Overreach​

1. Charging Plaintiff based on a system alert that expressly disclaims vault involvement constitutes arbitrary and overbroad enforcement.
2. Such enforcement exceeds constitutionally granted authority and violates fundamental protections under Azalea Isles law.

---

Count III – Violation of Procedural Due Process​

1. Plaintiff faces imminent deprivation of liberty and property based on a charge unsupported by statutory elements.
2. Threatened enforcement of an invalid charge violates procedural due process guarantees.

---

PRAYER FOR RELIEF​

Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court:

A. Declare Indictment #212 legally invalid for failure to meet the statutory definition of Bank Robbery;

B. Order dismissal or quashing of the charge prior to arrest or enforcement;

C. Enjoin the Ministry of Justice from arresting, detaining, or otherwise penalizing Plaintiff under the defective charge;

D. In the event the Ministry of Justice arrests or detains Plaintiff pursuant to Indictment #212, order:

• Full restitution of any fines collected, and
• Monetary compensation in the amount of $1 per second of jail time served, reflecting unlawful deprivation of liberty;​

E. Award legal fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff in this matter, as deemed fit and proper by the Court;

F. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

---

EXHIBITS

Exhibit A:

---

VERIFICATION​

I, Anthony_org, affirm that the facts stated herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

[Anthony_org]

EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

Plaintiff respectfully moves this Court for an emergency temporary injunction prohibiting the Ministry of Justice from prosecuting, advancing, enforcing, or otherwise acting upon Indictment #212 during the duration of this case. Absent injunctive relief, Plaintiff faces the imminent risk of arrest, detention, and prosecution under a charge that is factually defective and unsupported by the statutory definition of Bank Robbery.