All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s sentence (Defendant A: a fine of 6 million won, Defendant B: 4 million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial in relation to the determination of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The instant crime committed committed by the Defendants assault and obscing police officers dispatched after receiving a report of 112 from the time when the Defendants were faced with others, and, in light of the circumstances and contents of the relevant crime, the nature of the crime is not good.

Defendants committed the instant crime within the period of repeated crime after having been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a short term of 6 months for special larceny, etc. and imprisonment with prison labor for a long term of 1 year on November 201, 201, after having completed the execution of the said punishment, the Defendants committed the instant crime.

This is disadvantageous to the Defendants.

However, the Defendants are showing the attitude to recognize and reflect all the crimes of this case.

The Defendants appear to have committed the instant crime by drunkly, and the degree of physical force exercised by the Defendants at the time was not serious, and thus police officers did not have any injury.

Defendants are still in a position to support young and young families and will live in good faith.

There are many things.

This is favorable to the Defendants.

In full view of these circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and methods, and all the sentencing factors expressed in the instant records and trial process, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to have been too uneasible and unfair.

3. Conclusion, prosecutor.