2. In order to establish a judgment, establish a state’s legal order and eradicate the light of the public authority, there is a need to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties. The defendant is recognized as having three-time criminal records of violence, but it is recognized that the defendant has a three-time criminal records of violence, but the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties is not severe, and the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant due to the crime of obstruction of official duties (it can be seen that the circumstances such as the defendant’s filing of a letter to a public official who was the object of the crime of obstruction of official duties do not constitute a personal legal interest, even if the legal interest in the crime of obstruction of official duties is not a personal legal interest), there is no criminal record exceeding the same criminal record or suspended execution, and considering all other matters related to the defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and other records and arguments of this case, the prosecutor’s 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.