All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the Defendant’s case in light of the record, it is justifiable for the lower court to have rejected the assertion regarding the mental and physical disorder of the Defendant and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there is no error as alleged in the

In addition, in full consideration of all the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, occupation, type of crime, motive, criminal process, result, etc., it is justifiable to maintain the judgment of the court of first instance that sentenced the order to disclose personal information for a period of five years, even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, and there is no error as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, according 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 shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

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. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order, in light of the records, 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.