2. The crime of this case at the main point operated by the Defendant C, acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 80,00 by being provided with beerer and beerer with beer and beer, etc. by the Defendant, and insulted the victim E, a police officer called out after receiving a report due to not paying the drinking value, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties by assaulting the above police officer E, and the case is not less easily, the case is not easy, the victims agree with the victims, or the victim did not reimburse the victim C of the amount of damage, and the Defendant has been punished three times due to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime in an investigative agency; (b) the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission (the scope of recommendations for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties: between June and April) and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

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.