2. The judgment of the court below has already been punished twice for habitual larceny, and the defendant committed the habitual larceny of this case again despite the fact that he had been punished twice during the period of repeated larceny. The defendant committed the crime of habitual larceny of this case, which mainly was planned and specialized, by taking advantage of the Rarara's extraction of land from the Rara and do not get off, etc., and the method of crime is planned and specialized, etc., or the defendant reflects his mistake, and part of the victim was the defendant's wife. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit, since it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is excessive and unfair.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.