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 evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (i.e., robbery, etc.) around September 2, 2016

In so determining, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on robbery, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, examining various circumstances, including the age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment of the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”), the relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., indicated in the record, the sentencing of the lower court that upheld the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to 10 years of imprisonment and the fine of 6 million won, even if considering the circumstances alleged in the grounds for appeal, cannot be deemed as extremely unfair.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the request for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court has a risk of recommitting robbery 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.

In so determining, the lower court did not err as 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.