2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendants upon receiving the report 112 and thus obstructing the performance of official duties by assaulting the police officers dispatched by the Defendants, and thus, the crime of this case is a case requiring strict punishment for such crimes to establish a national legal order and eradicate the light of public authority.

The Defendants did not endeavor to receive a letter from the victimized Police Officers or recover the damage to the victimized Police Officers.

However, all the defendants show their attitude to recognize and reflect their crimes, and they are punished for the same kind of crime.

The extent of assault by the Defendants was relatively weak.

In addition, considering the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc. and all the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants cannot be deemed as unfair because it is too uneasible. Thus, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

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