The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The court below's sentence (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) against the defendant in summary of the reasons for the prosecutor's appeal is unreasonable because it is too unfasible.

Judgment

The crime of this case committed by the Defendant, upon receiving a report of 112, prevents a police officer from exercising his legitimate public authority by threatening the face of the police officer dispatched by the Defendant. The method and contents of the crime are significant, the Defendant did not receive a letter to the victimized police officer, and the Defendant had a record of being fined for the same kind of crime, etc. is recognized as disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the Defendant in our Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and direct care, where the first instance court did not change the specific area of the sentencing and did not change the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion and does not change the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance court’s sentencing did not go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015); the first instance court’s sentencing does not constitute an unfair change in circumstances, such as the following: (a) the Defendant’s wife, who reported the first 112, did not appear to have any particular circumstances; (b) the Defendant’s wife, who was under the influence of the trial-oriented principle and the first instance court’s judgment, did not appear to have changed the age of the Defendant.

The conclusion is.