All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the records of the accused case, the accused and the requester for probation order (hereinafter “defendant”) appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Furthermore, even if we look at ex officio, we can not find any error as alleged.

In addition, 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 on the grounds of unfair sentencing

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

2. As to the case of probation order claim, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment ordering the Defendant to be placed on probation for three years, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, by deeming that there is a risk of repeating sexual crimes.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment as otherwise 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.