2. The crime of this case is committed against a police officer who intends to arrest a person living together with D as a current criminal, and interferes with the performance of official duties by committing violence. In light of the background and form of the crime, etc., the criminal liability is not weak. In order to establish the national legal order and eradicate the light of the public authority, it is necessary to strictly punish a person who interferes with the performance of official duties.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to his confession of his crime; (b) the Defendant committed contingent crimes; and (c) the degree of tangible force during his commission was not significant; (b) the Defendant was a primary offender who has no criminal history; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, family relationship; and (d) various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after his commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unfas

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.