All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the Defendant’s case, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding non-criminal part) for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending relevant legal principles.

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.

2. In light of the following circumstances in light of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, is likely to repeat the offense of abduction against minors.

It is reasonable to order the attachment of an electronic tracking device for a period of six years.

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.