All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. On August 3, 2017, 00:03, the Defendant told that the victim C cannot operate a taxi in another area, as he or she was unable to operate a taxi in the front of the 747 Home plug, and he or she also stated that he or she “I am math amb amb amb amb amb, and I am amb amb amb amb. I am this amb amb amb. I am am amb. I am am amb. I am this amb am? I am am amb ambath,

The victim openly insultingd the victim by referring to the “hark sark”.

B. A victim C gets off the taxi vehicle at the same time and place as “A” before the assault was committed, and the door was rupture, rupture, and rupture with her chest part by hand.

2. Determination and conclusion

(a) Applicable legal provisions: Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act;

(b) Offenses subject to prosecution on complaint and crimes of non-violation of intention: Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act;

C. On April 23, 2018, after the prosecution of the instant case, the “written application for withdrawal of complaint and non-prosecution of punishment” stating the purport that “the injured party does not want to withdraw complaint and punish the accused” was submitted to this court.

(d) Judgment dismissing a public prosecution: Article 327 subparag. 5 and 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;