The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant was living together with the victim B (the age of 52) from 2007 to January 2018 and was de facto in a de facto marital relationship.

In the course of a lawsuit filed against the victim (such as consolation money, etc. due to de facto marriage) the Defendant sought to suspend the victim’s mobile phone damage under the victim’s name and sought to find it at the office of “D(s)” located in Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, which is operated by the injured party, around 13:50 on July 3, 2018.

“The victim was suffering from the trial,” and the victim was able to stop the mobile phone used by the party in the future even though he was able to bring a lawsuit against the party.

As “,” the victim refers to “Ig, Igra h. h. physical arms and clothes, and e.g., Igree chron chrone.”

Whether it is not so bruised or bruised.

“In doing so, you extracted their keys, and assaulted the victim’s face and neck as they may be, as they may be, the victim’s face and neck.

2. The facts charged of the judgment cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim in accordance with Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act as an offense falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act.

In such a case, since the victim submitted a written agreement on November 15, 2018, which was after the prosecution of this case, and withdrawn the wish to punish the defendant, the prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.