The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On July 22, 2017, the Defendant’s summary of the facts charged is why the Defendant would park this flick in this way with the victim B (70 years old, South) and the vehicle parking problems in the village of the Dolsan, such as the Dolsan Dol, Dolsan, etc. on July 22, 2017.

“I ambling the cost,” and “I ambling the victim’s “I ambling the road wide, and why is.”

The term "the person who reported the eropication" was flabed with the eropic of the victim who was the victim of the eropication, flabing the victim's flabage over the floor of each eropic, flabing the victim's flab, and flabing and s

2. The above facts charged are the crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

According to the records, the victim can recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on November 15, 2017, which is after filing the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.