The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: “The Defendant discovered D’s identity during the time he was in the old end of the South-west Navy C on June 30, 2014 at around 17:00 and around 17:00, and said D’s victim E (49:0).”

v. E.I.D.;

In light of the brush theory, “the breath fest tear,” the victim’s breging breging, which was a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. The victim withdrawn his/her wish to punish the Defendant on May 19, 2016, after the prosecution of the instant case was instituted, and thus, the prosecution of this part is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.