The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is a software development company’s operator of a software development company B, who operates the portal site with the Defendant’s name available at the portal site.

On July 7, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 17:14, 17:14, on the Robber Brog that he operated, “In conclusion, this brand is a false brand that makes the thickness of △△△△△△, if it comes to the end from the conclusion, this brand is a product that does not have a relationship with Germany (other than Germany) and Germany also does not have such brand in Germany.

"The same shall apply to the global brand(s) in which the emotional being unknown."

The same shall apply to brand marketing using the characteristics that Korean people are good to foreign products.

“The letter is posted, and it is also an enterprise that is all false when examining the history of the website.” In addition, under the above notice on December 1, 2015, it is the same as an enterprise that is all false.

I think this enterprise should disappear.

The purpose of defamation was to damage the reputation of the complainant by openly disclosing false information through information and communication network, as the victim Home Business, made a false brand in Germany, used it for marketing and took unfair profits.

2. Determination

(a) Applicable legal provisions: Article 70 (2) of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.;

(b) Crimes of non-violation of intention: Article 70 (3) of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.;

C. On March 22, 2018 after the prosecution of this case, the complainant submitted a letter of withdrawal of the complaint that the complainant would not want to revoke the complaint and the punishment of the defendant.

Judgment dismissing Public Prosecution: Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act