2. The judgment of the court below was made by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) disadvantageous factors such as assaulting a taxi engineer who is driving the taxi even after the taxi stops; (b) assaulting the taxi engineer to inflict an injury on the taxi engineer; (c) the police officer’s desire to remove the police officer even after the arrest was made; (d) disadvantageous factors such as the police officer’s failure to recover damage to the police officer; and (e) criminal punishment for the violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act in 1997; (c) there was no record of criminal punishment for violent crimes after criminal punishment was imposed; (d) the victim E of the crime of injury and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (accident, etc. of Drivers); (c) efforts to punish the police officer of the crime of interference with the performance of official duties; (d) favorable sentencing factors such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment; and (e) various circumstances that serve as the conditions for sentencing on the records and changes in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and circumstances after criminal punishment against the Defendant.

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.