2. The Defendant: (a) received a report of a assault case between the Defendant and the police officer, and obstructed the performance of official duties by the police officer; (b) inflicted an injury upon the police officer; and (c) damaged public goods and inflicted a second injury on the police officer even after arrival at the police box; and (d) the nature of the crime is very poor.

However, the fact that the defendant fully recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that the defendant deposited a total of 6 million won per 1.5 million won for four damaged police officers, that K and H wanted to take the defendant's wife against the defendant, and that the defendant is the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment, is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence, there is no special circumstance that the lower court and the punishment are different from the original judgment, and there is no change in circumstances that appear in the records and theories of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unfeasible.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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.