The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On October 1, 2018, at around 07:15, the Defendant neglected his/her duty of care to set up the opening door door door to prevent the Defendant from coming out of the opening, and ask the opening in order to prevent the occurrence of danger in advance. As such, the Defendant neglected his/her duty of care to prevent the occurrence of danger, he/she held the opening door door and held the opening door door to the victim D (at 15 years old), who was the victim D (at 15 years old) who was the victim of the excessive bridge, thereby causing the victim to suffer injury in the number of days of treatment.

2. The facts charged of the instant case are crimes falling under Article 266(1) of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 266(2) of the Criminal Act.

According to the agreement written by the parents of the victim, who are the legal representatives of the victims bound in the public trial records, the victim's parents may be recognized as having expressed their intent not to prosecute the defendant after instituting a public prosecution. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.