1. According to the records as to the accused case, the accused and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”) appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted only unfair sentencing on the grounds of the appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not recognize mistake of facts and mental or physical disorder is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, considering various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, the determination of the lower court’s punishment, which maintained the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to 13 years of imprisonment, is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel.

2. As to the claim for attachment order, the argument that the attachment order of an electronic tracking device for 20 years is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground of appeal.

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