The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a short term of one year and one year and six months.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment for a short term, one year and one year and six months) is too heavy or too unfasible; and

2. Ex officio determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment to add the facts charged to the previous facts charged at the time of the trial, and since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

B. Furthermore, in relation to the relation of acceptance of a crime, where a person who committed a crime, such as habitual larceny, under Article 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, has invaded upon his/her residence as a means of the crime, only one crime such as habitual larceny, is established, and does not constitute a separate crime. In addition, in cases where the criminal who committed the crime, such as habitual larceny, has been invaded upon his/her residence for the purpose of habitual larceny, in addition to the crime, and he/she did not reach the larceny, and even if he/she was found to have caused habitual larceny, he/she does not constitute only one crime such as habitual larceny, etc. as prescribed in the above Article, and constitutes a crime of habitual larceny, etc. separate from the crime of habitual larceny, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 84Do1573, Dec. 26, 198; Supreme Court Decision 2006Do6475, Jan. 11, 2007).