2. The crime of this case committed by Defendant A, carrying the body of the police officer on board, leading to drinking. Defendant B, in combination with the above police officer’s clothes and arms, took clothes from the police officer’s above police officer’s above police officer’s back to the boom, and obstructed the lawful performance of the police officer’s official duties in collusion by the Defendants, such as cutting the clothes from the police officer’s back to the bridge and cutting the bridge, etc., and thus obstructing the Defendants’ lawful performance of duties by the police officer. It is unfavorable that the nature of the crime is not good, and that there is no agreement with the police officer who was damaged until now.

However, there are more favorable circumstances such as the Defendants’ confession of their crime and reflects in depth the mistake, the degree of assault used by the Defendants is not much serious, the Defendant A did not have any history of criminal punishment, and Defendant B did not have any history of punishment exceeding the same criminal record or fine.

In addition to the above circumstances, considering various conditions of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the judgment of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion or to be unfair to maintain them as they are.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal against the Defendants 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.