1. Examining the evidence adopted by the lower court in light of the evidence, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of rape and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations and by misunderstanding facts in violation of logical and empirical rules.

Meanwhile, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may only be lodged by death penalty, imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence was imposed on the defendant, an appeal is not allowed to be filed with the Supreme Court on the ground

Furthermore, the claim of mental disability in this case where the court below recognized the defendant's state of mental disability and reduced the law by law does not constitute grounds of appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, it is justifiable for the lower court to have determined that the Defendant needs to receive medical treatment at a medical treatment and custody facility and that there exists a risk of recidivism.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of finding facts contrary to logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on requirements for medical treatment

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