2. The judgment of this case is a case where the defendant interferes with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the maintenance of order, and further damages the patrol car used by public offices to repair 479,356 won. In light of the contents and the method of the crime of this case, it is true that the criminal liability of the defendant is not easy. Furthermore, the defendant has been sentenced to 10 months imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a deadly weapon, etc., injury by a deadly weapon, etc.) in the Suwon District Court on July 9, 2008 and was sentenced to 2 years of suspended execution, despite the fact that he had the record of criminal punishment of fines for the same kind of crime (Seoul Central District Court 2005 High Court 29221) and committed the crime of this case at once without being among the people.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant is in a profoundly against the instant crime and did not repeat the crime; (b) the police officer did not interfere with the performance of official duties by directly assaulting the police officer; and (c) the degree of damage to patrols is relatively minor; and (d) other various sentencing conditions specified in the instant pleadings, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance after the commission of the crime, etc., the Prosecutor’s above assertion is rejected as it is deemed unfair since the lower

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.