The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 232(3) and Article 232(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, in a case which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent, withdrawal of his/her wish to punish may be made before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered. Thus, in cases where his/her wish to punish is withdrawn after the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered, such withdrawal shall not become effective, and thus, a judgment of dismissal of public prosecution under Article 327 subparag. 6 of the same Act shall not be rendered.

According to the records, a written withdrawal of a complaint to the effect that employee 28 withdraws the employee’s wish to punish the Defendant is known to the fact that the Defendant was submitted to the court of the original instance on October 11, 2016 and November 10, 2016, after the judgment of the first instance was rendered. Thus, the withdrawal is not effective, and the grounds for appeal against this issue are not accepted.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.