2. In order to establish the legal order of the judgment state and eradicate the light of the public authority, there is a need to strictly punish the act of obstructing the performance of official duties. In particular, in this case, if the police officer did not comply with the unreasonable demand of the defendant that received the drinking value from the customers, the defendant spits spits over two times toward the back water and face of the police officer. In light of the method of the act and the degree of the police officer’s damage assessment, the crime is considerably heavy.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the method of the act, although the method of the act was insulting, it does not reach the degree of exercising a tangible force that could inflict physical harm on the police officer’s body, and the act itself itself does not have any objective risk to interfere with the performance of official duties, and the Defendant does not have any particular criminal record except for a fine of KRW 300,000 as a crime of assault around 201, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background leading to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be appropriate, and it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

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