The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the director of the D Infant Care Center, and the victim E (V, 14 years old) was the child of the D Infant Care Center.

On March 4, 2016, at around 22:00, the Defendant sent a warning to the D Infant Care Center that did not have a school by the injured party in the D Infant Care Center F, the Defendant: (a) laid down the victim, shut down the entrance of the center, shut down the door of the center; (b) followed the victim, “I am off the victim;”

눈에 뵈는 게 없나

“In doing so, at the left hand, the victim’s right bucked on one occasion and assaulted the victim’s hair.

2. We examine the judgment. The facts charged in this case cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim in accordance with Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act, as a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act.

According to the written agreement prepared by the victim bound in the public trial records, the fact that the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant on July 14, 2016, which was after the institution of public prosecution. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.