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 this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err

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 stated that the court below erred in the violation of law or misunderstanding of legal principles in its judgment, it is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. As to the claim for attachment order, the argument that the attachment order of an electronic tracking device for 15 years is too harsh 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.