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 legal principles related to the determination of the Defendant case and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free conviction by violating the logical and empirical rules, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free conviction, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, 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 imposed, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Defendant

In this case where a person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") is sentenced to more minor punishment, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that the disclosure order and notification order of personal information against the defendant are unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the defendant's ground for appeal or the court below's decision was not subject to judgment ex officio.

2. The argument that the attachment order of an electronic tracking device is improper as to the claim for the attachment order is asserted by the Defendant as the ground for appeal or by the lower court’s ex officio, and is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.