2. The prosecutor's point of view that a strict warning is necessary is given that the nature of the crime is not less vulnerable in light of the motive and circumstances of the crime, such as the price-fixing of the victimized police officers.

However, considering the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case as an initial offender with no record of punishment, it seems that the risk of repeating the crime of this case would not be likely to cause any fear thereof. Above all, the defendant has agreed with the taxi engineer about the assault part of the taxi engineer, which was the starting point of the case, as he reflects his depth, and his father has agreed with the damaged taxi engineer, and his father and his father have directly found the victimized police officer, and the situation in which the injured police officer has actually received a letter is peeped, and the sentencing of the court below seems to be appropriate in light of all other circumstances, which are the conditions for the punishment of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, and environment.

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.