All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the mental and physical disorder, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, that the lower court rejected the Defendant and the person requesting an attachment order

Examining various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age and behavior environment, relationship with victims, motive means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, etc., as indicated in the records, it is extremely unfair to maintain the judgment of the first instance court that sentenced the Defendant to 10 years of imprisonment with prison labor, even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

The argument that the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the basis of a confession without credibility of the victims is erroneous by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, even though the defendant was sexual intercourse under agreement with the victims, shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, since the defendant's assertion that there was no ground for appeal or that the court below did not consider it as the object

Furthermore, even if examining the record, the court below did not err by exceeding the principle of free evaluation of evidence to find the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal principles on sexual assault crimes.

2. As to the claim for attachment order, the argument that the attachment period of an electronic tracking device is too unfair is not a ground of appeal as stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it cannot be 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.