1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the Defendant case in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending

B. According to Article 383 Subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed only for a case on which death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. As such, the argument that the Defendant and the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) were unduly unreasonable in the instant case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) is

2. As to the claim for attachment order, the argument that the attachment order of an electronic device against the defendant is too excessive shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.