2. We examine the judgment. Each of the crimes of this case is an injury to the victim B, an acting driving engineer, on the ground that the defendant does not have a way in which he/she goes in the usual course. It is acknowledged that the defendant committed an injury to the police officer, who was under the influence of alcohol and received a report by assaulting the victim C while under the influence of alcohol even though he/she was prosecuted due to the crime of this case, and the nature of the crime is not good. The police officer's degree of public power is necessary to strictize the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in order to protect the legitimate performance of official duties of the State and to establish a sound social order in the present situation where the police officer is under the influence of large number of disorderly civil petitioners due to the weakening of public authority, and there is no agreement with the victims up to the trial court, and criminal punishment of the defendant is six times every kind of crime.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the fact that the defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, that the defendant seems to have caused the crimes of this case by contingency, that the court below deposited 50,000 won for the victim B and E, that the degree of injury of the victims is not more than 2 weeks and 3 weeks, that the defendant did not have a criminal record of suspended execution or more, that the defendant does not repeat again, that there is a family member to support the defendant, and other favorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it is difficult for the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.