2. The crime of this case committed by the Defendants, under the influence of alcohol, interfere with the victim’s business by destroying restaurants, etc., and by assaulting the police officers dispatched after receiving a report 112, thereby obstructing the execution of official duties, and is not good.

However, in full view of all the circumstances indicated in the arguments of this case, including the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is not less exceptionally, in full view of the following: (a) Defendant A did not have any other criminal history as a fine; (b) Defendant B did not have any history of criminal punishment exceeding a fine; (c) Defendant B did not have any history of criminal punishment; (d) Defendant B was aware that the crime was committed from the stage of investigation; (e) Defendant A was found in the restaurant where the damage was directly caused after the crime was committed; and (e) Defendant A has

3. The appeal against the Defendants by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.