2. In order to establish the legal order of the judgment state and eradicate the light of the public authority, the need for strict punishment for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, that there is no criminal record against the defendant, that there is minor degree of assault, that the victim police officer was subject to death, and that the social relationship of the defendant is relatively clear is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the circumstances and motive, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments and records, there is no change in circumstances to determine different sentences from the lower court. As such, the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable, the Prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is rejected.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.