Each public prosecution against the Defendants is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant B reported that a temporary building for the purpose of the management office was an illegal building in the forest and forest owned by Defendant A, and there was an appraisal among them.

A. On 02. 07. 07. 07. 12:10 on 07. 07. 07. 12:10, Defendant B put a door on the debtor D in the victim A’s residence.

Defendant

B The victim A “I anywhere.”

“I,” to the victim A, “I,” refers to “I,” and flabbbbling a victim A’s bat, and was pushed down with a left hand.

B. Defendant A, at the same date, at the same time, and at the same place as the A. B, had the victim B dump of the Defendant A, set up against the spather, and spathered and pushed down the victim B’s flaps.

2. Each of the above facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

However, on September 12, 2017, the Defendants expressed that they do not want to punish each other on the first trial date after the prosecution was instituted.

Therefore, the prosecution against the Defendants is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.