The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The crime of mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles is due to the defendant's difficulty and gambling, and even though the defendant's habituality is not a crime that has been habitually revealed, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to habitual larceny.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, habitualness refers to a habit that repeats larceny, and the existence of criminal records in the same kind of crime and the frequency, period, motive and method of the crime in the same case should be comprehensively considered in determining whether habituality exists.

(2) The defendant, on April 9, 1993, is sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the following facts: (a) the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the night building intrusion larceny at the Busan District Court on December 24, 1996; (b) the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of larceny at the Seoul Central District Court on October 20, 198; (c) one year from imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of special larceny; (d) ten months from May 10, 200; and (e) one year from imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of larceny at the Busan Central District Court on May 9, 200; and (e) two months from imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of larceny at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 9, 200; and (e) one year from the Seoul Northern District Court on May 12, 201 to one another without prison labor for the crime of larceny; and (e) one year from the Seoul Southern District Court on May 12, 2010.