The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, in a case involving a prosecuted case, where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is permitted. As such, in a case where the defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”) are sentenced to a more minor sentence, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence

2. As to the medical treatment and custody claim case, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined that the Defendant needs to receive medical treatment at the medical treatment and custody facility and the risk of reoffending, and imposed the Defendant on

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, even if the circumstances alleged in the grounds of appeal are considered.

3. The lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, ordered the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 20 years, deeming that the risk of recidivism exists.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, even when considering the circumstances alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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