All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the Defendant case, the lower court’s finding the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules.

In addition, according to Article 383 (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 is imposed, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

In this case where a person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") is sentenced to more minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. In light of the Defendant’s age, character and environment, the motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, as well as various circumstances indicated in the records, with respect to the request for attachment order, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, has the risk of recidivism of sexual crimes against the Defendant.

It is reasonable to maintain the judgment of the first instance that ordered the attachment of an electronic tracking device for ten years.

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.