The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

2. On March 28, 2019, at around 14:36, the Defendant expressed, without any justifiable reason, the victim D (num, 26 years of age), and victim E (num, 57 years of age) at home in front of the C’s language located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and expressed the victim’s desire to “hys and hysium hysium hysium hysium hysium hysium hysium hysium hysium hys

Judgment

The facts charged in the instant case cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim under Article 283 (3) of the Criminal Act, as a crime falling under Article 283 (1) of the same Act.

According to the records of this case, it is recognized that the defendant submitted to the court a written agreement with the victims on September 4, 2019, which was prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, stating the victims' intent not to punish the defendant, and the court below should have dismissed the prosecution of this case by judgment pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Nevertheless, the lower judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged is unlawful.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

【Reasons for the Judgment of the Supreme Court, which is written,】 The facts charged in the instant case are as follows.

as described in subsection 2-b above.

As examined in the above paragraph, the case constitutes a case where there is an expression of intent not to punish the defendant against the clearly expressed will of the victim.