2. The crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties requires strict punishment as a crime detrimental to the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority. Thus, the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties in this case is not good for the case where the defendant assaultsd the victim D, and assaulted the police officer F dispatched upon receiving a report on the above facts of assault, thereby obstructing the legitimate performance of official duties.

However, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the circumstances before and after the crime, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee established, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since the sentence of the lower court is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

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.