All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the records on the Defendant’s case, the Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted the unfair legal principles of sentencing and mental and physical weakness on the grounds of appeal, but revoked the grounds for appeal on the first trial date of the lower court’s first trial, by misapprehending the legal principles and the grounds for appeal on mental and physical weakness.

In such a case, the argument that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime or was erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal doctrine cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, risk of recidivism by the Defendant.

The judgment of the court of first instance ordering the attachment of an electronic tracking device for a period of five years is just, and 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.