2. The judgment of the defendant has the history of punishing the defendant for having been sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and the defendant's act interfered with the victim's business by avoiding disturbance by entering the victim's gambling room into the victim's gambling room, taking a bath to the surrounding persons, etc. In addition, the defendant's act of official duties by using violence by police officers E and J, who called the victim's disturbance at park, and by taking serious bath to the police officers E and J when the defendant called out for the disturbance in park and so on, and thereby obstructing the police officer's performance of duties by using force, such as breathing and breathing, etc. of the police officer's breath, and it is not good that the damaged police officer's arms were inflicted the injury. Nevertheless, the defendant denied his criminal act from the investigation process of this case to the trial of the victim, and did not make any effort to recover the victim's damage, etc., and thus, is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, it is difficult to view that the amount of damages suffered by the victim G and the victim police officers due to the instant crime is relatively excessive, and considering the overall sentencing conditions, such as the victim G does not want punishment against the Defendant and the Defendant’s age, environment, and sexual behaviors, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfasible and unreasonable, and the prosecutor’s above assertion is without merit.

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