The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged and the victim B are residents of the Seo-gu Seoul metropolitan apartment.

On September 28, 2014, the Defendant, as a result of the appointment of an executive officer of an apartment complex around September 28, 2014, disputes the attachment of each other on the grounds that E, a resident of the same apartment, who was a resident of the foregoing apartment apartment, was “slick,” and that the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s dialogue. The Defendant publicly insultingd the victim “the victim, such as the spacker, violent spack, and spack.”

2. Article 312(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 327 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act [Article 327 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do1171, Nov. 10, 1981)]