협박
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. On November 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) on November 28, 2017, recorded the victim C’s sexual intercourse with the victim’s three photographs coming from the victim’s vehicle and coming from the victim’s room; and (b) sexual intercourse with the victim; and (c) before and after the conversation with the victim.
On March 19, 2018, from around 15:54, to around 09:17, the following day, the Defendant sent one of the above photographs to the victim by using the Defendant’s mobile phone at an insular place via the Defendant’s cell phone from around 15:54 to around 09:17, and the contact is cut.
“After sending the message to the victim on July 21, 2018, whether or not “the victim does not answer to contact” via the victim’s Face on July 21, 2018;
On July 29, 2018, “Titre” sending a message of the content, and delete a photograph and a sound recording file three times in the sexual relationship.
The message sent ‘the content’.
Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim.
2. The conclusion of the judgment is that a crime falling under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 283(3) of the Criminal Act.
According to the records, the victim can recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on November 16, 2018, after the prosecution of this case was instituted.
Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.