All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The allegation that the lower court’s determination of sentencing on the Defendant case contains an error of law such as incomplete deliberation, mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, etc. constitutes an unfair allegation of sentencing.

Defendant

In addition, examining various circumstances, including the age and character environment of the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”), the relationship with the victims, the motive and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the determination of the lower court’s punishment, which maintained the first instance judgment sentenced to 25 years imprisonment for the Defendant, is extremely unfair, even if considering the circumstances alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. In light of the following circumstances in light of the Defendant’s age, character and environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, deemed that the Defendant is likely to repeat the crime of murder.

It is reasonable to maintain the judgment of the first instance that ordered the attachment of an electronic tracking device for a period of 20 years.

There is no error as 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.