All prosecutions against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is between the husband and wife and the neighbor C.

In the middle of November 2012, the Defendants: (a) there was no fact that the victims C had stolen the fluened rice of the Defendants in the Agricultural, Agricultural, and Rural Development Center located in Ulsan-gu, U.S., Ulsan-do; (b) however, the Defendants: (c) they listen to the victims in the process of gathering the horses from the Defendants, and (d) they have damaged the reputation of the victims by openly pointing out false facts on several occasions, such as “I would not bring about any fluen in the middle; (b) you would not bring about any fluen in the middle; (c) I would bring about any fluencies of E, F, and G, etc. on the top of the community hall located in the Ulsan-gu, U.S., Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S.; and (d) later, I would like to get off the rice processing site and deducted them from it.”

2. We examine the judgment. Each of the facts charged against the Defendants is a crime falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 312(2) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, the victim C can be recognized as having withdrawn all the wishing to punish the Defendants after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case against the Defendants is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.