1. As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and the respondent for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”)

A. As to the accused case, the judgment of the court below erred by exceeding the inherent limit of sentencing discretion.

The argument that there is an error of violating the principle of balance between crimes and the principle of responsibility, is ultimately an assertion 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed on the above defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court with respect to the request for attachment order, the lower court is justifiable to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for six years by deeming that the risk of recidivism of sexual crime and recidivism exists, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there is no error of law as

2. As to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the allegation that the lower judgment erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on sentencing, thereby infringing on the principle of balanced criminal punishment and the fundamental contents of the principle of accountability constitutes an allegation of unreasonable 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed on the above defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

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