2. The Defendant made a false report to 112, putting the kitchen knife, which is a dangerous thing, to the police officers dispatched, and putting the kitchen knife, which is a dangerous thing, and thus making it very poor in the nature of the crime, and interference with special performance of official duties is an offense detrimental to the State’s functions by nullifying legitimate exercise of public authority, and requires strict punishment in that it may inflict harm on the police officers’ life or body in performing official duties.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant did not have any means of punishment except for the second fine due to drinking driving; (d) there was no substantial damage to police officers; (b) the reason for sentencing of the lower court was reasonable and there was no special circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court when the lower court was in the trial; and (c) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, conduct, intelligence and environment; (d) motive, background, means, method, method, and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime; and (e) the Defendant’s punishment is not deemed unfair

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.