2. The fact that the defendant denies the crime, and the crime of this case is committed by the defendant with a frighten landscape in the course of performing his duties, and the nature of the crime is not good, the landscape of the damage wants to be punished by the defendant, and the fact that the defendant has been punished once due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, there was no history of punishment imposed on the defendant, the landscape of damage did not inflict an injury on the defendant, and this case was the starting point of the case where the defendant told that the parent of a person who was in the process of his own behaviors and in the process of vision "do not have a disability." However, due to the relation with the defendant's disability, the defendant seems not to have made the above remarks with the intent to insult the other party. Nevertheless, there was a favorable circumstance for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was arrested in the police, and that he would have committed an contingent crime after he was arrested, there was no change of circumstances that may be special consideration in the trial, and all other factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is proper.

3. Therefore, 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.

However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the “1. Defendant’s legal statement” in the summary of the evidence of the lower judgment shall be corrected to “1. Defendant’s partial statement”.