The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found the Defendant guilty of injury by rape among the charges of this case, and ordered the Defendant and the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 40 hours and to disclose information on the Defendant for five years, is justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of

In addition, pursuant 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 more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

2. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court with respect to the request for attachment order, the lower court is justifiable to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 10 years by deeming that the risk of recidivism and recidivism of sexual crimes exists, and there is no violation of law as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.