2. On the other hand, it is not good that the Defendant assaulted a police officer who was dispatched after receiving a report due to his disturbance, thereby hindering his business and destroying the public authority. Moreover, the Defendant committed an injury to the said police officer due to the above assault, etc., which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognizes and reflects the instant crime; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed contingent acts under the influence of alcohol; (c) the injury inflicted upon the police officer is not limited to the extent that it requires two weeks’ treatment; and (d) the Defendant was a primary offender without any previous conviction; and (e) the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing the instant crime, and circumstances before and after committing the instant crime, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the instant records and pleadings, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unfair.

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.