The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (legal scenarios) that the defendant agreed with the court below that the victim H of assault, and thus, the court below did not render a judgment dismissing the prosecution as to the act of assault among the facts charged in this case.

2. Determination

A. On May 5, 2018, at around 13:24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) heard that, following the National Assembly’s second session, the Defendant visited the police officer in charge, to “whether there is no problem to keep the police officer in charge,” and (b) heard that, following the 14:58, when the Defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of assaulting the victim Fow (the 60-year age), who is the representative within the C Party, who is the representative within the C Party, of the C Party, was under the influence of the police officer when he was arrested as a police officer on one occasion by drinking at his left hand; and (c) followed the police officer’s assault of the victim H (the 29 years old age) who was under the influence of the police officer.”

B. This part of the facts charged is an offense falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

According to the records of this case, a written agreement was prepared to the effect that the defendant does not want to be punished on June 1, 2018, which was prior to the pronouncement of the lower judgment, and that the defendant was submitted to the lower court on or around the fourth of the same month, and thus, the lower court should have dismissed the public prosecution against this part of the facts charged pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the application of the law as to the dismissal judgment under Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's assertion is justified.

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered after pleading.

[Judgment which has been written]