2. The circumstances are that the Defendant’s act of threatening the police officers to interfere with legitimate execution of duties and to extinguish the public authority by threatening them to use his hand, and that there is no good character of the crime, and that the Defendant has been punished once for violent crimes are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects on the Defendant’s act, and the instant crime appears to have committed contingent acts by using grandchildren who were kept by the Defendant for a farmer under the influence of alcohol. The Defendant agreed with the victim. The Defendant has been punished twice by driving alcohol other than the previous one, the Defendant has no criminal record of suspension of execution or more, the Defendant has a wife and a child studying in the Republic of Korea, there is no special relationship or change of circumstances that may be newly considered in the trial, and the Defendant’s age, environment, sex behavior, motive for the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime cannot be deemed to be unfair by taking full account of all the various circumstances, which are the conditions for the sentencing specified in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual behavior, motive for the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime

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.