2. The judgment of the court below does not recognize that the punishment imposed by the court below is unfair because it is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) under the influence of alcohol, the defendant took a walk at a restaurant and took a bath to the police officer who was dispatched to the scene after receiving such a report; (b) not only threaten the police officer with a personal-purpose pen; (c) it is necessary to strictly punish the act of obstructing the performance of official duties in order to establish the national legal order and eradicate the light of public authority; and (d) the fact that the injured police officer did not receive a letter from the police officer until now is disadvantageous to the defendant; (c) the defendant shows an attitude against his mistake; (d) there was no history of punishment for the same crime; (d) there was a family member who will support; (e) the defendant's age, sex, family environment; (e) the motive and background of the crime; and (e) other various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case, including the circumstances before and after the crime

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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.