The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant does not look at the mind of the female entertainment reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception reception

Some times of request for replacement, however, the victim D(25) who is an employee refuses to replace the victim's face no longer than this, and spits the victim's right face into the hand floor, and spits the victim's face on the ground that the victim's right face was taken into drinking, and the victim's face was taken into the above amusement shop, and the victim's face was 26 years old.

The Defendant continued to use violence as above, on the ground that the Victim F(33) visited the Defendant as a customer, was flicked twice in the floor of the victim’s face, and the Victim G (V, 33 years old) opened this toilet and opened it against the Defendant, and the Defendant was flicked, the Defendant’s hand was flicked in the toilet door.

Accordingly, the Defendant assaulted D(25)(25), E(26), F(33) and G(33 years of age) as victims respectively.

2. This part of the facts charged is a crime 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, on January 19, 2016, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted by D, E, F, and G, the victims, the victims of this case, withdrawn their wish to punish the Defendant. Thus, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.