All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

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

In this case, the Defendant had a mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime.

The argument that the defendant did not intend to take the property or to take the property forcibly cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court that maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was not deemed to have been in a mental disorder at the time of the instant crime, and that the Defendant had an intent to forcibly take property.

Any other assertion to the effect that an opportunity for the recovery of damage may not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, examining various circumstances, such as the age, character, intelligence and environment of the defendant, the motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the determination of the sentence of the court of first instance that maintained the judgment of the court of 15 years sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant, even when considering the circumstances asserted by the defendant and the public defender, cannot be deemed as highly unfair.

2. As to the case of the request for attachment order, a state appointed defense counsel asserts to the effect that the period of attachment order for 20 years is too long and unreasonable, but such assertion 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.