The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The gist of the facts charged was that the Defendant engaged in agriculture, while standing at the entrance of his house abutting on the road along which ordinary people pass.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to raise a dog at a safe place, such as inside or behind the road that residents pass along, to replace the saves so that they can not leave by themselves, to remove the danger factors of residents who pass through by replacing them with the saves so that they can not leave by themselves, and to prevent accidents from causing other damage.

Nevertheless, when the defendant neglected his duty of care and the dog owned by the defendant was cut down, the defendant sustained the injury of the victim, who passed his seat in order to conduct a health examination before the defendant's house, due to his own self-fashion, and 3 parts of the bridge and the son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son.

2. Determination

(a) Crimes of non-compliance with an intention: Article 266 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act;

B. Submission of a written agreement on December 23, 2016, which states the intent of the victim not to be punished, after the institution of public prosecution;

C. Judgment dismissing a public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act