2. The crime of this case is established when the Defendant, at the packaging end operated by the victim B, drinked the victim by drinking alcohol to the victim himself and destroyed the glass of the display site due to the victim’s disease. The crime of this case was committed by the police officer D who was arrested by the police officer D who was dispatched after being reported to 112 and moved to the patrol vehicle while being on the police station after being arrested by the police officer D who was dispatched to the police station, and obstructed the performance of official duties by taking the face for drinking and obstructing the performance of official duties. In light of the content and circumstances of the crime, the issue is not easy in light of the contents of the crime, and in order to establish the state’s legal order and eradicate the light of public authority, the crime of interference with the performance of official duties

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake; (b) the Defendant did not want the Defendant’s punishment in agreement with the victim B at the lower court; and (c) the Defendant did not have any history of any particular criminal punishment other than the punishment imposed twice by the fine of this kind; and (d) the Defendant’s age, environment, family relationship, circumstances leading to the instant crime; and (b) circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing indicated in the record, the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible

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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.