All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment, No. 1) is too vague and unfair.

B. The above sentence of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. The Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected his mistake, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant’s crime of obstruction of performance of official duties cannot be deemed to be light of the nature of the crime, and the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victimized police officers or the victim of the instant crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of suspension of execution after being sentenced to a suspended sentence for the same crime, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

Considering the above circumstances and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, health conditions, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is deemed appropriate as a punishment within the scope of the discretion of sentencing.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.