The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant’s husband, who is the husband of the facts charged, was aware of the victim C’s previous conviction in the course of investigation related to the Daejeon District Prosecutor’s Office of District Prosecutors’ Office No. 4211, which was the main text of the facts charged, and then delivered the facts to the Defendant.

A. On January 11, 2017, the Defendant sought to enter into an E’s house located in Da, Seosan-si, and agreed to “C’s previous conviction and self-contributate” in the F’s place where E and E’s children are located.

“The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly pointing out facts by talking the victim’s previous convictions.”

B. On January 11, 2017, the Defendant would be disadvantageous to C in terms of “C fine of one million won” at the location where H, I, and J, etc. is located at the H’s house located below G in M, M, I, and J, etc.

“The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly pointing out facts by talking the victim’s previous convictions.”

2. Determination

(a) Crimes of non-violation of intention: Article 312 (2) of the Criminal Act;

B. On April 6, 2017, after the institution of the instant indictment, the victim C withdraws his wish to punish the Defendant.

Judgment dismissing Public Prosecution: Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act