2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant upon receiving a 112 report and used violence against the police officers dispatched by the Defendant. The nature of the crime is not good. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, such as this case, needs to be punished in order to establish the legal order of the State and eradicate the light of public authority, and the fact that the victimized police officers did not receive a brupt from the police officers.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected his mistake, and that the defendant was the first offender who has no criminal record and did not repeat the crime is favorable.

In full view of the above circumstances and all other factors of sentencing as indicated in the pleadings of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive for committing a crime, means and consequence of a crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasy and unreasonable.

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