2. The following facts: (a) the Defendant, upon receiving a report from the Defendant, expressed a desire to the police officer who was called out, and inflicted an injury; (b) the Defendant’s direct use of violence against the police officer in uniform, etc.; and (c) the obstruction of performance of official duties is very poor; and (d) the crime of abusing official duties is a crime detrimental to the State’s function by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority;

On the other hand, the circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant seems to have reached the crime of this case by contingency while under the influence of alcohol, the fact that the victim's injury seems not to be serious, and the fact that the defendant has no other record of crime except sentenced to a fine due to an injury

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s allegation above 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.