The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the punishment imposed by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment, and 40 hours of an order to attend the alcohol treatment course) is too unfeasible, in light of the fact that the defendant repeats the same crime despite the number of violent criminal records of the defendant; and (b) that requires strict punishment for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties to eradicate the light of public authority

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the trial, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of this case, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfeasible and so it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.