2. The crime of this case against the grounds of appeal is a serious crime since it is highly dangerous that the defendant's act of blocking the front of the victim's vehicle in front of his own vehicle by pointing out a false fact that the victim has committed a bad will with his husband, and damages the victim's reputation by blocking the front of the vehicle driven by a dangerous object, which is a vehicle. As such, the defendant's act of blocking the front of the victim's vehicle in front of the vehicle traveling along his own vehicle on the road operated by a large number of vehicles may cause serious damage to the life and property of the victim as well as the victim, and there is no reason to believe that the crime of this case is committed.

However, it is recognized that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects them, the Defendant did not have any record of punishment other than the fine imposed as a violation of the Food Sanitation Act prior to about 20 years, and the Defendant did not have any relatively much damage to the victim due to the damage of the instant crime. In full view of all the favorable circumstances in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.