2. Considering the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal (the fact that the nature of the crime of this case was poor to obstruct the performance of official duties by using violence against police officers dispatched after receiving a report 112), the court below's decision on the grounds of sentencing (the defendant's argument is without merit, and the degree of violence seems to have resulted in contingent crimes in the state of interesting his father and his father, the defendant's mistake is not severe, the defendant's mistake is divided and reflected, and the defendant's initial crime is the first offender) and all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, including all of the sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments. Thus, the sentence imposed by the court below is judged appropriate, and it is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment to the effect that "13:0 times" of the crime among the facts charged in the instant case is changed to "0:40 times" and this court permitted the amendment, but the amendment of the indictment for the trial was changed to the extent that the correction of the clerical error and the exercise of the defendant's right to defense

As such, the judgment of the court below is not reversed due to changes in the indictment, and Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure does not correct "13:00" among the facts constituting the crime of the court below as "0:40".