2. The crime of this case is acknowledged as having been committed by the Defendant, despite the Defendant’s demand to return home from the police officer at the Public Security Center, and thus obstructing the lawful performance of official duties by assaulting the police officer, and the liability for the crime cannot be deemed to be less and less, and the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties that disregards public authority and obstructs criminal justice procedures requires strict punishment. However, this seems to have been already considered in the sentencing of the lower court.

In addition, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime; (c) has no record of being punished in Korea; and (d) the degree of assault is not serious; and (c) the equity in sentencing with similar and similar cases; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime; and (e) various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, including the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it is not deemed unfair

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

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.