All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In full view of various circumstances, such as the age, occupation, criminal record, type of crime, motive, criminal process, result, etc. of the defendant and the person subject to an order to attach an electronic device (hereinafter “the defendant”), as indicated in the records of the defendant's case, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal on the ground that the lower court’s issuance of an order to disclose and notify personal information for ten

The Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance court, and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court did not ex officio consider the matters alleged in the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the allegation that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes is not a legitimate ground of appeal.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 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, an appeal may be filed on the ground

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the request for attachment order, in light of the record, the lower court did not err by deeming that the Defendant was likely to recommit a sexual crime and ordering the attachment of an electronic tracking device for ten years.

3. The Defendant’s final appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.