2. The lower court determined that ① the Defendant’s act of self-defense in the investigative agency and the court was not clearly seen as having been committed on the date and time indicated in the facts charged.

(3) On May 2016, the date of the instant facts charged, the F reported 112 to the effect that “the second half of the 30th half of the 30th half of the 30th half of the 1950s in which the sculatory sculping and the sculing sculping sculping sculping was done.” On the date stated in the facts charged, the F reported sculing that the Defendant was a person who had been reported at the same time, but it was thought that it

A statement was made to the effect that the Defendant could not accurately express his or her opinion on the ground that he or she could be a person who is neither superior nor superior, and (4) G present at the date and time indicated in the facts charged as stated in the court of law as if he or she did so with her abstin and her old urology in the court of law.

Magnes, above, to the following:

Now we did not see any scam, but scam like scam at the time of scam prior to the day.

Mambun has been spread across the area.

It was not deemed to have been exposed to out of the sexual organ.

Although the defendant did not have taken a hand in his gender, he was in the same position that he did not change.

They did not scam or commit self-defense.

After indicating the statement to the effect that “the defendant did not see the defense of the person who tried to see the defense,” the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, in light of the above circumstances, shall be dismissed, and the defendant shall be dismissed.