2. It is recognized that the instant crime committed by the Defendant, by assaulting a police officer who performed official duties, obstructed the performance of official duties, and that there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant in light of the recent situation of public power, and that the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victimized police officer.

However, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the crime; (b) there was no history of punishment heavier than the fine; and (c) there was no record of punishment for the same kind of crime; and (d) the degree of assault was not severe; and (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.