2. The crime of this case is acknowledged as a case where the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, expressed a desire to a police officer who was dispatched after receiving a report of 112 while avoiding disturbance in his residence and used his force to force force, and the nature of the crime is not good in light of the circumstances and methods of the crime. In the event of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, the crime of this case requires a corresponding punishment in order to establish the state’s legal order and eradicate the danger of public power.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and commits the instant crime; (b) the degree of damage suffered by the victimized police officer is relatively excessive; (c) the crime of injury in 1985 is not subject to criminal punishment for the crime of violence except for the crime of injury in 200,000 won; (d) there is no equity in sentencing with the same or similar incidents; and (e) there is no special change in circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the lower judgment; and (e) other factors of sentencing as indicated in pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, and the consequence, etc., the sentence

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