The investigation of political factions in the Tokyo City Assembly in the Itabuneken and Hiratabuneken Compensation Case prompted this egregious political corruption case to come to surface. In 1934, Taishinin placed a spotlight on the Keisei Electric Railway Company, whose business reputation was juxtaposed with the stigma of bribery for permission to extend railway line to downtown Tokyo. Appellants’ fifty-five legal representatives mainly lodged appeal grounds of no knowledge of being promised bribe, the Tokyo City Assembly member’s power vacuum before reelection and the legislative injustice of Article 55 of prewar Penal Code 1907, which was about a continuous serial crime (renzokuhanichizai). The controversial legal interpretation of the currently deleted Article 55 was embedded in Germanic jurisprudential concept of legalitätsprinzip instead of evolution of Japanese legal culture. Studying a posteriori, the compensation case in last chapter and this Keisei case confirms that the nature is irrelevant to renzokuhanichizai of several consecutive acts that constitute the same crime. Legalitätsprinzip in the “transplanted Germanic legal jacket” could not be fitted on the “body of Japanese jurisprudence” by renzokuhanichizai. This chapter confirms that Taishinin’s judicial behaviour is stricter than that of the postwar Supreme Court of Japan.