The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Around November 17, 2013, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against the victim D(60 years of age) of the Madern manager who frighted on the part of the Defendant, while drinking alcohol within the Da-si B and drinking alcohol; and (b) Madern manager D(60 years of age) who frighted on the part of the Defendant: (c) flicked the Defendant’s Madern couple’s flick; (d) flicked the Defendant’s head flick; (d) flicked the Defendant’s head flick; and (e) flicked the flick.

Judgment

However, this 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. According to the records of trial of this case, it can be acknowledged that the victim expressed his/her wish not to punish the defendant on November 23, 2013, which was prior to the prosecution of this case. Thus, the above public prosecution constitutes a case where the procedure for prosecution is in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes and becomes null and void, and the public prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 2 of the