The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year of suspended sentence of six months, one year of suspended sentence of imprisonment, and one observation of protection) is too unfford and unfair.

2. The judgment of the defendant has been subject to punishment four times of a fine due to the same violent crime, and the obstruction of the performance of official duties and the crime of injury in this case committed by assaulting the police officer who performed official duties and obstructing the performance of official duties and causing the injury at the same time, which requires a strict punishment in consideration of the recent situation of public authority, and it is recognized that there was no agreement with the victimized police officer.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant has no criminal history heavier than the fine, the fact that he/she has been punished in depth, the fact that he/she has agreed with the victim of the damage to property, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices. However, since it is obvious that “G” in Article 25(1)3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, among the judgment below, is a clerical error in the “F”, the correction is made ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.