All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records, the lower court’s rejection of the Defendant and the person requesting an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s mental and physical disorder based on the circumstances indicated in its reasoning is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Examining various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and criminal records, etc., the amount of punishment by the lower court that upheld the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to 15 years of imprisonment with prison labor, even if the circumstances alleged by the Defendant are invaded, is extremely inappropriate.

The argument that an order of disclosure or notification for a period of 10 years is excessive shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. As to the claim for attachment order, the argument that the attachment order of an electronic tracking device for a 20-year period is too excessive shall not constitute a legitimate ground 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.