The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where a thief intrudes upon his residence as a means of committing the crime of larceny, it does not constitute an element of larceny in general, except at night as provided in Article 330 of the Criminal Act and special larceny as provided in Article 331(1) of the Criminal Act, and in a case where the thief intrudes upon his residence as a means of the crime, the act of intrusion upon his residence constitutes a separate crime of intrusion upon his residence and constitutes a separate crime of larceny, and in principle

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 84Do1573 delivered on December 26, 1984). In addition, Article 332 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who habitually commits a crime of simple larceny (Article 329 of the Criminal Act), night-time theft (Article 330 of the Criminal Act), special larceny (Article 331 of the Criminal Act), and illegal use of a motor vehicle (Article 331-2 of the Criminal Act) shall be punished by adding one half of each punishment prescribed for the crime. Thus, the above provision differs from the treatment of habitual larceny, night-time larceny, or habitual special larceny (damage by night-time), which is a constituent element of a residential intrusion, shall be punished by adding more statutory punishment to the punishment for each crime of habitual larceny, night-time larceny, or habitual special larceny (damage by night-time), which is a constituent element of a residential intrusion.

Therefore, in a case where a person who habitually commits a simple larceny has violated his/her residence during the daytime as a means of habitually larceny, the evaluation of the illegality of the act of housing intrusion during the daytime cannot be deemed to be included in the evaluation of the constituent elements of Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, if a criminal who habitually commits larceny stipulated in Article 332 of the Criminal Code intrudes upon his/her residence as a means of committing the crime during the day, his/her act of intrusion upon his/her residence constitutes a crime of intrusion upon his/her residence separate from habitual larceny.

In addition, a criminal who habitually commits larceny stipulated in Article 332 of the Criminal Code shall be punished for the purpose of larceny.