All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules in determining the guilty of the instant facts charged.

Defendant

In full view of the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the age, occupation, criminal record, type of crime, motive, criminal process, result, etc. of the person subject to a request to attach an order to attach an electronic device (hereinafter referred to as “defendant”), the lower court did not err by issuing an order to disclose and notify personal information for three years on the ground that the lower court did not have any special circumstance that the disclosure of personal information should not be disclosed to the Defendant nor any special circumstance that would not restrict employment, and issuing an employment restriction order with child or juvenile-related institutions

According to Article 383 subparagraph 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, an appeal may be filed on the ground

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the above assertion or punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the request for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court maintained the first instance judgment ordering the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for three years, deeming that there is a risk of repeating sexual crimes.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on risk of recommitting sexual crimes, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal

3. The Defendant’s final appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.