2. Determination

A. Although Defendant A received a request from a police officer who was dispatched after receiving a report from a neighboring resident to avoid disturbance in his residence, it is deemed that such legitimate performance of official duties was not good, and the nature of the crime is not recognized, it is not recognized that the Defendant committed a crime, and there is no other crime except juvenile protective disposition, and that the Defendant did not have any other criminal force against the police officer; the Defendant agreed with the police officer who was assaulted at the lower court; the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, the process and motive leading up to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B assaulted a police officer against a police officer’s legitimate performance of official duties who arrests Defendant A as an offender in the act of committing an offense. The social need to protect the legitimate exercise of public authority is large; the Defendant reflects the wrong act while committing an offense; the degree of assault against a police officer is minor; the Defendant did not have any other criminal records other than juvenile protective disposition; the Defendant has agreed with the police officer who committed an offense at the lower court; the Defendant’s age is lower than that of the Defendant’s age; and other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, the process and motive leading to the instant offense; and the circumstances before and after the instant offense, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. The conclusion is as to the Defendants of the prosecutor.