2. Although there are circumstances unfavorable to the Defendants, such as the extent and form of obstructing the performance of duties by police officers in this case, the degree and quantity of participating in the general traffic obstruction by Defendant A, and the Defendants’ records of punishment for the same or similar crime, the above facts appear to have been determined by the court below in consideration of the above facts. There is no reason to change the sentencing in the court below.

On the other hand, in full view of the motive and background leading up to the commission of the instant crime and other circumstances revealed in the instant records and arguments, including the age, career, character and conduct, the environment, and the means and consequence of the commission of the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is determined within the reasonable and appropriate scope, and it is not determined that the sentence imposed by the Defendants is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. The appeal against the Defendants by the prosecutor in conclusion is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.