The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Interference with the execution of official duties is an offense detrimental to the State’s function by nullifying legitimate exercise of public authority, and requires punishment corresponding thereto for establishing national legal order and eradicating the state’s light of public power. The fact that each of the instant crimes was committed by the Defendant several times prior to the same crime is also subject to criminal punishment. However, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence against the Defendant, taking into account all the aforementioned circumstances into account, and there is no special circumstance or circumstance that may newly consider the sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower court’s judgment, and the Defendant’s character and conduct, the Defendant’s environment, motive and means of the instant crime, the motive and consequence of the instant crime, etc.

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.