The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On January 1, 2013, when there was a dispute over the division of property with the victim B, the Defendant, at around 12:37, called “the victim’s cell phone phone,” called “the victim’s cell phone, with the victim’s cell phone,” and reached the victim repeatedly by telephoneing eight times from that time to June 23:31, 2013, as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

2. The above facts charged constitute a crime falling under Article 74(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s specifically manifested intention pursuant to Article 74(2) of the same Act. According to the records, it can be acknowledged that the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant on November 5, 2013, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.