A. The punishment of the lower court (a fine of 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence (a fine of four million won) imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, upon receiving a report 112, interfered with the performance of official duties by the police officer who was victimized by drinking while taking a bath against the victimized police officer, and thereby obstructing the performance of official duties by the victimized police officer with regard to the handling of 112 reported duties. The act of obstructing the performance of official duties may interfere with the establishment of legal order and order, and undermine the authority of the public authority, and the Defendant is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, it is favorable to the defendant that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against the nature of the defendant, and that the degree of the use of force against the victimized police officers is relatively much serious.

In full view of the above normal relationship and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the judgment of the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

In addition, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no change in circumstances that it is unreasonable to maintain the sentencing of the lower court in the

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.