The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The defendant and his defense counsel filed an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing and mental and physical weakness in the judgment of the court below only on the first trial date after submitting a statement of reasons for appeal for sentencing only on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

Although the above argument of mental or physical weakness is alleged, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal as it is alleged after the lapse of the period for submission of reasons for appeal.

In addition, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant received hospital treatment from April 15, 2014 to December 26, 2017 due to alcohol using disorder, depression, etc., and even if he/she is recognized that he/she had drinking to a certain extent at the time of committing an attempted special robbery on December 26, 2017, it is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime in light of the background, means and methods of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, the circumstances after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the degree of statement stated by the investigative agency after the instant crime was investigated as the victim, and the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state that he/she lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

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

The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant shows the attitude to recognize and reflect all of the instant crimes, and the crime was committed in the course of attempted crimes.

The Defendant’s mental health status is not good, such as alcohol use disorder, depression, etc., being receiving hospital treatment from April 15, 2014 to December 26, 2017, and is not deemed to be mental and physical weakness, but seems to have been a part of the crime.

However, the crime of this case is committed with deadly weapons and threatening the victim to force the withdrawal of cash, and the crime of this case is not likely to be committed in light of the method, content, danger, etc. of the crime.

The defendant has been punished several times due to theft, etc., and is against the same victim at intervals of seven days.