2. The judgment of the defendant was sent to the police officer by drinking alcohol, and the defendant took a bath and injured the above police officer, the degree of interference with the performance of official duties is serious, the crime is not good in light of the circumstances of the crime, and the act of obstructing the performance of official duties of the police officer in uniform is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant accepted the judgment of the court below and reflects his wrong, that the leg is inconvenient due to different military discipline, and that it is the first offender who has no criminal history is favorable to the defendant.

As above, all other circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, the age of the accused, the sexual conduct, the family relationship, the environment, and the occupation, constitute ordinary concurrent crimes, it is difficult to apply the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee as they are.

In addition, in full view of the facts that there is no change in the circumstances that could otherwise determine the original judgment and the punishment, the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and thus, it cannot be deemed unfair, so the prosecutor’s allegation of the above sentencing is rejected

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.