1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged were guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and to order the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”) to disclose information about the Defendant for three years. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation

2. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the lower court in light of the evidence regarding the claim for attachment order, the lower court is justifiable to impose an order on the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for five years by deeming that the risk of recidivism and recidivism of sexual assault crimes exists and to attach an electronic tracking device; and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on proportionality, etc.

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