1. As to the assertion regarding res judicata

A. Where a person who has been convicted of habitual offenders committed a crime by the same damp wall thereafter, and a new trial has commenced for the final judgment of conviction (hereinafter referred to as “prior crime”), and even if a subsequent offense by the same damp wall was committed prior to the pronouncement of a new judgment on the judgment subject to new trial, res judicata effect of the new judgment does not extend to the subsequent offense.

In addition, even in a case where a judgment on a subsequent offense was first rendered and became final and conclusive prior to the pronouncement of a new judgment on a prior offense, res judicata of the judgment on the subsequent offense does not extend to the prior offense (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Do20698, Jun. 20, 2019).

According to the records, the following facts are revealed.

On May 9, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 17, 2013, with respect to the criminal fact that he/she habitually stolen the victims' bags on November 10, 2012 and on March 16, 2013 (hereinafter “instant crime”).

(hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial” (hereinafter “instant judgment”). A new trial was initiated regarding the instant judgment subject to a retrial. On December 23, 2015, the lower court, which was the procedure for a new trial, rendered a judgment of conviction on the instant crime, the indictment of which was modified for habitual larceny.

On May 15, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny on December 21, 2014, and on January 16, 2015, and on May 23, 2015, the judgment became final and conclusive on May 23, 2015, with respect to the criminal facts that brought the victims’ mobile phones, etc. to habitually steals (hereinafter “instant subsequent crimes”).

C. In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Defendant.