The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the extent that the sentence (2 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below is too unfased.

2. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties requires strict punishment for the establishment of public authority and the protection of legal order, and the fact that the defendant has been punished several times of violent crimes is disadvantageous.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by contingency at the time of parking in a state of desire and interest; (b) the Defendant’s mistake and reflects the Defendant; (c) the Defendant did not have any record of being punished by the obstruction of the performance of official duties; and (d) other factors such as the Defendant’s age, criminal records, sexual intercourse, occupation, occupation, environment, motive and background of the commission of the crime, means and method of the commission of the crime; and (e) all sentencing conditions, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed unfair

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

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.