1. The argument that the lower court’s failure to deliberate on the Defendant’s case constitutes an unfair argument in sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

In this case where a person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") is sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable or that the order of disclosure and notification of personal information is unfair is not legitimate.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order, in light of the records, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its holding, risk of recidivism

It is reasonable to order the attachment of an electronic tracking device for a period of three years, and there is no violation of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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