2. In light of the methods of assault committed by the Defendant by the police officer, such as walking bucks by the Defendant, etc., the degree of obstructing the performance of official duties by the police officer cannot be deemed to be light. However, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant took the attitude of acknowledging the Defendant’s mistake by university students aged 25 years or older; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in contingency under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol; and (d) other circumstances such as character, character, environment, social relationship, criminal history, circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., such as the Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, etc., and the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the proper scope of discretion on sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.