1. The argument that the lower court erred in misapprehending the legal principles as to sentencing on the accused case constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, and an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where the defendant and the person requesting an attachment order are sentenced to a minor sentence, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable cannot be a legitimate

2. With respect to the case of the request for attachment order, since the order to attach an electronic tracking device for six years is too harsh, the assertion that the order is revoked or reduced during the six-year period is not a legitimate ground 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.