The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On July 4, 2016, the Defendant: (a) accessed the Internet E site using smartphones in the Defendant’s residence in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul on July 4, 2016; and (b) referred to “F” as “F”, under the article of “F”; (c) from the mother of the head of the Tong-gu, the Defendant was living together with “F,” and (d) from the mother of Tong-gu, the Defendant was changed from one to one of one from one of one of one of one of one of one of one of one’s head, so the Defendant would have to change the president.

dynasty dynasty written by the press

It is necessary to see why why we want to blue together with that part of this part, and why we see such a blue monm.

'The comments on the comments' were posted.

In fact, however, the mother of the victim did not have all his life together with his father and son.

As a result, the Defendant, for the purpose of slandering, damaged the reputation of the victim by disclosing any false fact openly through an information and communications network, and thereby damaging the reputation of the victim through an information and communications network for the purpose of defameing the victim. The facts, such as the list of crimes, from November 6, 2016 to July 31, 2016, do not have any fact that the damaged person has disguised academic background or occupation, and even though the mother of the injured person had not lived with his father and father, the Defendant, in total, destroyed the reputation of the victim by disclosing false information openly through the information and communications network for the purpose of slandering the victim by posting comments on the comments on the said article three times in total, although the mother of the injured

2. Each of the facts charged in the instant case is a crime falling under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Protection of Information, Etc., which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s will specifically manifested pursuant to Article 70(3) of the same Act. According to the written withdrawal of complaint filed in the trial records, the victim may recognize the fact that he/she had withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on September 5, 2018, which is the date of the instant indictment. Thus, each of the instant charges is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.