All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining various circumstances pertaining to the accused case, including the age, conduct, intelligence, and environment of the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “the accused”), the motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the determination of the lower court’s imprisonment with prison labor for 12 years cannot be deemed to be extremely unfair, even in light of the circumstances asserted by the accused and the public defender.

2. The argument that the period of attachment of an electronic tracking device is too unfair is not a ground of appeal as stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus does not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal. Furthermore, in full view of all the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age and happiness environment, relationship with the victim, motive and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, the motive and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, it is justifiable for the court below to maintain the judgment of the court of first instance ordering the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 15 years on the ground that the risk of recidivism exists, and it cannot

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