The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. Around October 13, 2017, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant, as the victim C (the age of 29) in the Suwon detention house B, was able to take TV as of October 13, 2017; and (b) the Defendant used the victim’s humping that “the humping of the Defendant was humping because the location was narrow and the victim was refused; and (c) the victim, who was humping the Defendant’s humping by the humping of the Defendant and the victim, was able to take advantage of the victim’s humping by the humping of the Defendant and the humping of the victim.

2. The act of a defendant in judgment shall not 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 same Act

However, according to the statement of the police statement dated October 11, 2017 prepared by the victim, the victim may recognize the fact that the victim already expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the defendant before the prosecution of this case.

On the other hand, on October 18, 2017, the victim stated to the effect that "the victim is subject to criminal punishment against the defendant, unlike the relocation." However, as long as the victim expresses his/her wish not to punish a person in the crime of non-prosecution, the victim may not withdraw his/her expression of intent in accordance with Article 232 (3) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

If so, the withdrawal of the expression of non-prosecution of punishment on October 18, 2017 does not take effect, and eventually, the public prosecution of this case is null and void in violation of the provisions of law. Thus, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act.