The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (3 million won in penalty) declared by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime while being tried through a obstruction of official duties, but the Defendant was not subject to punishment heavier than the fine, and the circumstances alleged by the Prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are deemed to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the lower court, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court in the first instance.

When comprehensively taking into account such circumstances, the degree of tangible force used by the Defendant, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, various sentencing conditions as indicated in the records and arguments in the instant case, such as the record and the changes thereof, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to have been too uneasible.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.