The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant and the victim B (30) are between C elementary school employees.

On March 2, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed assault on the face of the victim who had been seated on the top floor E restaurant of the D Building No. 23:00 on March 2, 2017, when the victim, who had been in the past, read “in fluently fluent fluent fluent fluor.”

Although the Defendant continued to move out of the place and tried to resolve the above assault with the victim, the Defendant, who did not intend to do so, committed an assault that makes the victim's face one time.

2. The grounds for dismissing the public prosecution of this case are the crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the statement of non-permanent sources of punishment bound in the public trial records, it can be recognized that the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant on March 30, 2017, which was the date the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.