A. On September 5, 2012, the Defendant damaged the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by openly pointing out false facts, in spite of the fact that the victim, who was a fact at the depository of the third floor E in the city where the Defendant was able to engage in the Defendant, at the 40 male and female members, there was no fact that the victim, who was a fact, was the Defendant, at the depository of the third floor E in the city where the Defendant had 40 male and female members.

B. The Defendant above A.

The facts at the time, location, and location of subsection (a) had the victim’s identity by openly pointing out false facts and impairing the honor of the victim on the job where 40 male and female members are located. The victim, “I know that there is a woman on the job. I have made a direct telephone with the wife. I will be bomb to the wife.”

C. The Defendant above A.

The facts at the date, time, and place of a claim were not the victim’s desire to go G, but the victim’s reputation was damaged by publicly pointing out false facts in the sense that “the victim had expressed an desire to enter G and its neighboring persons for a year, not to enter G.”

2. The judgment is a crime falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 312(2) of the Criminal Act. The records show that the victim has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on June 4, 2013, which was after the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.