2. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance where the crime of this case was committed by a police officer who was called up and called up by the defendant after receiving a report of 112 and tried to rescue the defendant, and the crime of this case was committed by assaulting the chest part and face part, thereby obstructing the performance of duties by the police officer. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties requires strict punishment in order to establish a legal order, and the fact that the defendant did not receive a letter from the police officer who was damaged.

However, it is necessary to respect the judgment of the court below on the ground that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the court below because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial at the court below. In full view of the following: (a) the defendant reflects in depth the crime of this case; (b) the defendant committed the crime of this case in a contingent manner under the influence of alcohol; (c) the degree of interference with the performance of official duties was not severe; (d) the defendant did not have any criminal record for the same kind of crime; and (e) the defendant did not have any specific criminal record other than three times; and (e) the details and result of the crime of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, character and conduct, environment, age

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.