1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case (excluding the part dismissing prosecution) on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only a case on which death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed is permitted to file an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, in this case where the defendant and the requester for an order to attach an electronic device (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") have been sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that

In addition, although the written ground for appeal submitted by the defendant contains a violation of law or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court below, it shall not be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the court below in light of the request for attachment order, the court below is just to order the attachment of an electronic tracking device for 10 years on the ground that the defendant is likely to recommit a sexual crime, and there is no error as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

In addition, the argument that it is improper to determine the duty to comply with the victim E during the period of installation of the location tracking device is not 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.