All appeals filed by prosecutors and Defendant A shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor’s Defendants (the Defendant A’s imprisonment of six months, and the Defendant B’s fine of five million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The fact that Defendant A recognized the facts charged in this case and showed an attitude against the defendant, and that the defendant deposited KRW 500,000 for the victimized police officers in the original trial, and additionally deposited KRW 300,000 for each of them in the first trial, and that the damaged police officers expressed their intention to not punish the victim in the first trial is more favorable.

However, in order to establish the state's legal order and eradicate the light of public authority, the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, such as this case, requires strict punishment, and the degree of assault against the Defendant's victimized police officers is not somewhat weak, and the form of conduct is bad, such as shaking and shaking, etc. The Defendant again committed the crime of interference with the performance of official duties on April 2, 2017 under the circumstance where the date of sentence was determined, and the Defendant committed the crime of interference with the performance of official duties on May 28, 2017, and the Defendant committed the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In addition, taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant case, circumstances after the commission of the offense, and other various conditions of sentencing as shown in the pleadings, etc., considering the changes in circumstances with respect to the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, the sentence imposed by the lower court was too excessive or too heavy, and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Since it cannot be determined by a person, it cannot be viewed as unfair.

B. The sentencing of Defendant B is, based on the statutory penalty, discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, our country.