The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) in light of the following: (b) the Defendant, even though he was in a repeated period, was under 112 reported and sent to police officers upon 112, who obstructed the performance of official duties by exercising their desire and direct force; and (c) the quality of the crime is not good; and (d) the need to strictly punish the Defendant in light of the intent of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, etc., punishment of the lower

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.