All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the crime of this case committed by the Defendant assaults the victim without any particular reason while being under influence of alcohol, and thus, during being arrested and being investigated by the police station, the nature of the crime and the circumstances that obstruct the performance of official duties, such as spitation, etc., are not good, and that the obstruction of the performance of official duties requires strict diversification for the establishment of public authority and the protection of legal order, the police officer's damage has not been recovered, and the Defendant again commits each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crimes, even though he had been punished 20 times for the same violent crime, including the obstruction of the performance of official duties.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions stated in the pleadings of the instant case, including the fact that the Defendant’s mistake is recognized, the degree of exercise of each type of force of the Defendant seems not to be excessive, and the fact that the injured party does not want the punishment of the Defendant by agreement with the victim of the crime of assault, and other sentencing conditions stated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as age, sex, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the lower court does not seem to be too weak or unreasonable.

The prosecutor and the defendant's arguments are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That the "written statement by the police against C and F" by the third party of the summary of the evidence of the judgment below is clear that the "written statement by the police against E, written statement by C, and written statement by the police against C", and the "one to Fifteen years of imprisonment" by the third party of the judgment of the court below among the reasons for sentencing is each clerical error in the "one to fourteen years of imprisonment".