2. The crime of this case is acknowledged in the following circumstances: (a) under the influence of alcohol: (b) the Defendant was subject to a police officer E’s guidance for returning home; (c) the Defendant was placed at least three occasions in a patrol line; (d) the head was sealed into the patrol seat; and (e) the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties by pushing the chest of the said police officer; and (e) the case is not easy in light of the content and circumstances of the crime; and (e) in order to establish the state’s legal order and eradicate the light of public authority, there is a need to punish the Defendant, such as the crime of this case, to commit the obstruction of performance

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake; (b) the Defendant did not have any previous record; (c) the Defendant’s family members and branch persons want to take the Defendant’s front seat; (d) the Defendant’s family members supporting the Defendant; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, the process and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.