1. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant on the ground that there was no proof of crime on all of the facts charged in the instant case regarding the violation of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders as of October 2, 2016, November 4, 2016, and November 17, 2016.

In light of the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed the entire judgment of the court below, but the guilty part does not indicate the grounds of objection against the petition of appeal or the reasoning of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of the Defendant’s appeal in light of the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, found the Defendant guilty of both violation of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Electronic Devices, on October 31, 2016 among the facts charged in the instant case, and on December 4, 2016, based on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine, contrary to what is 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.