All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by rejecting the Defendant’s and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s assertion on mental and physical weakness, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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 declared, an appeal can be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

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

2. The lower court finds that the Defendant is in danger of recommitting robbery.

In the light of this, the first instance judgment ordering the attachment of an electronic tracking device between 10 years was maintained.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the risk of recommitting robbery, 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.