The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: ① on October 14, 2011, the Defendant assaulted the victim on 7-8 occasions in order to use the victim’s head and part of the victim’s head at one time and ten times in drinking, because the victim’s head and part of the victim’s head and part of the victim’s head were 10; ② on December 15, 2011, the victim changed transportation expenses at the same place on the ground that the victim said that he/she was able to solve by creating transportation cards; ③ on March 14, 2012, the Defendant opened the victim’s cell phone at 10 minutes and 1:3:0 on the ground that he/she was able to use the victim’s head and part of the victim’s head and part of the fright at 7-8 times; ③ opened the victim’s cell phone at 0:0 on March 20, 2012, and opened the victim’s cell phone at 1:3rd.

2. Each of the above facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the witness D’s legal statement, it can be acknowledged that the victim expressed his/her intent not to be punished against the defendant on October 15, 2013, which is after the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.