2. It is recognized that the instant crime was committed by assaulting a police officer who performed official duties and obstructing the performance of official duties by the Defendant, and that there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant in light of the recent situation of public power.

However, considering the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the crime; (b) there was no history of punishment heavier than the fine, and there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime; and (c) the fact that the victimized police officer took advantage of the receipt of a letter from the victimized police officer; and (d) appears to have committed the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character

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.