2. The fact that the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the fact that the Defendant was committed while committing a repeated crime is not aware of the fact that the Defendant, who caused interference with the police officer’s duties and destroyed the public authority, was not good, and that there was a record of punishment once by obstructing the performance of official duties.

However, the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects the criminal facts, that the victim C and the police officer want not to want the punishment of the defendant, and that the victim C and the police officer want not to want the punishment of the defendant, that there is no criminal record of suspension of execution or more of execution due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties and violent crimes, that the criminal record of the above repeated crime was not a crime of fraud,

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances before and after committing a crime; and (b) the sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is somewhat minor.

Even if it is not so unfair that it should be destroyed.

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.