2. Each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant, under the influence of alcohol, enter the victim's house.

In order to establish the State’s legal order and eradicate a light of the public authority, the crime of interference with the execution of official duties such as this case requires strict punishment, the degree of interference with the execution of official duties of this case is not easy, the defendant did not receive a letter from the victimized police officers, and the defendant was suspended from indictment due to interference with the performance of official duties of this case, and even if there was a history of criminal punishment for the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, the defendant committed the crime of interference with the performance of official duties of this case.

However, considering the favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s confession of each of the crimes in this case, the Defendant appears to have committed each of the crimes in this case by contingency, the victim of the crime in this case did not want to be punished by the Defendant, and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime in this case, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and changes of the records, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because the sentence imposed by the court below is unexistent.

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