The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The facts charged in the final judgment of the court below and the facts charged in larceny Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court below are only the victims, and the method of crime are the same. Thus, the facts charged in this part of the judgment of the court below should be sentenced to acquittal because it constitutes a final judgment of the court below.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (one month of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the argument of misapprehension of the legal principle as to a habitual crime, where a judgment of conviction has become final and conclusive on a part of several of the facts constituting a comprehensive crime, if a new prosecution has been instituted on the remaining crimes committed before the judgment of facts was rendered, the new prosecution shall be rendered by judgment on the same case as the case where the final and conclusive judgment was rendered. However, in order to apply this legal principle, it is necessary that the relevant defendant is prosecuted for a habitual crime, and if he is committed as a basic crime not for a habitual crime, it is necessary that the relevant defendant should be punished for a habitual crime, and if he is committed as a crime constituting a basic crime not for a habitual crime, he shall not be deemed as a comprehensive crime as a habitual crime, even if he is judged to be a final and conclusive judgment on the part of a habitual crime prior to the judgment of facts, and such new prosecution shall not be deemed as a final and conclusive judgment on the remaining crimes prior to the judgment of conviction (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Do326, Sept. 26, 2004).