The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is a factor for sentencing that is favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant divided his mistake into two parts, the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case in a state of mental and physical disability, which seems to have been committed contingently due to mental disorder, most of the damaged items were recovered to the victims, and some victims did not want the punishment of the defendant, and have been engaged in volunteer activities for a long time while living in a difficult environment, and the present health situation is not good.

However, the crime of robbery injury by robbery of this case is a dangerous substance, causing injury to female victims under 74 years of age on several occasions, and the quality of the crime is not good. The crime of robbery injury is deemed to have suffered physical or mental harm. The defendant committed each of the crimes of this case again in about one month after the execution of imprisonment with prison labor by larceny, etc., and other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, intelligence, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as a whole, and it is not unreasonable for the court below to have determined that the punishment of this case is appropriate and too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.