All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment in relation to the Defendant case, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, among the grounds of appeal, the argument that the defendant and the requester of the order to observe the protective custody and custody (hereinafter "defendant") at the time of the crime of this case was in mental and physical loss beyond the level of mental and physical weakness at the time of the crime of this case cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal since the defendant's ground of appeal or the court below did not consider it as a subject of judgment ex officio.

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

2. In light of the following circumstances in light of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, criminal record, motive means and consequence of the instant crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the first instance court maintained by the lower court is likely to recommit a sexual crime against the Defendant.

In light of the above, it is just to order the protection observation for three years, and there is no violation of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. As long as the defendant filed an appeal against the Defendant’s medical care and custody application case, the appeal is deemed to have been filed as to the medical care and custody application case.

However, there is no statement in the petition of appeal the reasons.