2. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance, where the Defendant interfered with the victim’s convenience store business and reported on the crime, thereby obstructing the performance of official duties by assaulting a police officer dispatched after receiving a report on the crime, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties is highly likely to be punished for the purpose of establishing national legal order and eradicating the reputation of public authority.

However, the circumstances are that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the primary offender, the agreement with the victim of the obstruction of duties, and the extent of violence against the obstruction of the performance of official duties is relatively excessive.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that may otherwise determine the sentencing conditions and the punishment different from the original judgment, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.