2. We examine the judgment of the court below. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendants upon receiving a report and obstructing the lawful performance of official duties by assaulting the police officers dispatched by the Defendants. It is not good to commit the crime, and the Defendants did not agree with the victimized police officers.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendants recognized the instant crime and divided their errors; (b) the Defendants did not have any record of being punished for obstruction of performance of official duties in the past; (c) the extent of violence is relatively minor; and (d) the police officers did not have the status due to the instant crime; and (c) the sentencing conditions specified in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, the background of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, are considered, and the Defendants’ punishment imposed by the lower court is deemed unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.