1. According to Article 383 Subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is pronounced.

Therefore, in this case where the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter "defendant") are sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the request for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court has a risk of recommitting a sexual crime

Therefore, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the risk of recommitting sexual crimes, etc., as alleged in the grounds of appeal, in ordering the attachment of an electronic tracking device for five years.

3. The Defendant’s final appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.