1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable to maintain the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the appeal did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, according to various circumstances, including the age, criminal record, sexual conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. of the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “the defendant”), there is a substantial reason to recognize that the amount of punishment of the court below, which maintained the judgment of the court of first instance that sentenced the defendant to 20 years of imprisonment with prison labor, is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted by the national defense counsel.

subsection (b) of this section.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, has the risk of repeating murder crimes against the Defendant.

In light of the above, it is justifiable to maintain the first instance judgment ordering the attachment of an electronic tracking device for a period of 20 years, and there is no error as 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.