The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is not aware of the victim B (the 49 years of age, the remaining), the victim C (the 56 years of age, the remaining), the victim D (the 65 years of age, the 65 years of age, the remaining), and the victims will work as the dong residents.

At around 22:00 on August 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) committed assault to the Defendant, i.e., the victim D while drinking alcohol in front of the “F convenience store” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) while drinking alcohol in front of the “F convenience store”; (c) during the victim’s daily activity in front of the “F convenience store” in Gangnam-gu, Seoul; (d) “Aber land is well aware of the son’s son; and (e) thrown away the son’s inner part of the victim B by drinking it twice as a drink; (e) thrown the inside part of the victim C twice as a drink; (e) thrown the victim’s inner part of drinking; and (e) assaulting the victim D’s body by drinking it, making it possible for the victim D to drink it.

2. The judgment was based on the following facts: (a) an offense 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 same Act; and (b) the victims have expressed their intention not to prosecute the Defendant on October 16, 2015, which was after the institution of the instant prosecution. Thus, the instant prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.