The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant and the victim B (the remaining) operate the real estate office in the same commercial building, and the defendant operates the real estate office, and the victim operates C store.

On September 25, 2014, at around 15:38, the Defendant: (a) expressed that the victim would repair a commercial toilet used for official use in the Nam-gu Gwangju metropolitan area D, which was operated by the victim B, by dividing it into rest and rest toilets; (b) but, on the ground that the victim did not repair, the Defendant used the victim’s body twice, with the victim’s body being tightly sealed and frighted into a toilet.”

Judgment

The above case falls under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Code, and it cannot be prosecuted against the will expressed by the victim in accordance with Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Code.

However, according to the records, the victim can recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on November 6, 2014, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.