The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (for four months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. In order to establish the legal order of the judgment state and eradicate the light of the public authority, it is necessary to strictly punish the act of obstructing the performance of official duties, and the Defendant’s use of a directly tangible force on the police officer’s body, such as growing a food and growing a boat, etc., is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, it is the sentencing factor favorable to the defendant that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, seems to have committed the crime of this case by contingency under the influence of alcohol at the time, and that there is no specific criminal history after being sentenced to a fine once in 2008.

In addition to all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, family relationship, etc., the judgment of the court below for one year of suspended execution in April of the defendant seems to have sufficient preventive effects. Thus, even though the court below excluded the lower limit of the recommended sentencing range (one year to four years of imprisonment) set forth in the sentencing guidelines, the court below excluded from the sentencing guidelines.

Even if the sentence imposed on the defendant is too unfasible, it can not be considered unfair.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.