The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The suspended sentence of the punishment of the first instance judgment against the accused in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too uncomfortable and unfair;

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the following: (a) the nature of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties; (b) the need for strict punishment; and (c) the negative effects of the punishment against the principal offender, etc., the prosecutor’s assertion that the sentencing of the first instance judgment, which has been suspended by the sentence of a fine, is excessively and excessively weak is unreasonable.

However, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant specified in the judgment of the court of first instance, the sentencing measures of the court of first instance, which are somewhat exceptional, have been fundamentally erroneous.

It is difficult to deem that the assessment of sentencing conditions has reached the degree of confluence.

In light of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court because new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial; and (b) the background and result of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; and (d) various conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed; and (d) the Defendant’s character and conduct, etc., the sentencing of the

3. Since the appeal by the public prosecutor is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.