2. Determination

A. The Defendant exercised violence against a police officer on official duty. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties is recognized that there is a need to strictly punish him as a crime that undermines the function of the State by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority, and that there is a history of having been punished several times as violent crimes, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime again in two months after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year on August 21, 2015 due to the crime of obstructing the performance of duties on August 29, 2015, by being sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a period of suspension of execution on April and on August 29, 2015.

B. However, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s confession of a crime and the fact that the Defendant is against the police officer, the degree of assault against police officers, and the Defendant’s age, background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, 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 prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.