The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The Defendant violent crime committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that 6 times (two times a suspended sentence, and 4 times a fine) has been punished for the same kind of crime (crimes of injury to public use). However, there are unfavorable circumstances such as the fact that police officers want to punish the Defendant, that there is a need to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in order to establish the state’s legal order and to eradicate the culture of public authority. However, the Defendant’s confession and reflects all of the instant crimes, the degree of assault of the instant crime is relatively excessive, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court for the instant crime [basic crime: obstruction of performance of official duties, mitigation element - where the degree of assault and intimidation is minor, it falls under the area of mitigation of punishment for eight months or less, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the instant crime, motive, etc. are not unreasonable. Thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is unreasonable.

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