Each public prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the president of the branch association D, and the defendant B’s chief director of the branch association.

In collusion, around February 19, 2012, the Defendants made a statement to the effect that, although there was no fact that the victim H was retired from the company due to mental illness 15 and 6 years prior to the victim H, the victim made a statement to the effect that “the victim is a person retired from the workplace going due to mental illness before 15 and 6 years,” and the victim’s statement to the effect that “the victim is a person retired from the workplace due to mental illness.” The victim made a statement to the effect that “the victim was submitted to the case of suspension of the performance of duties and appointment of acting parents against the Defendants, including the above contents, and made a false statement by submitting the above case with the signature of the above relatives.”

2. As to the above facts charged, a public prosecution cannot be instituted against the victim's explicit intent under Article 312 (2) of the Criminal Act, which is a crime falling under Articles 307 (2) and 30 of the Criminal Act. According to the records, the victim can be acknowledged that he/she submitted a written agreement to the effect that he/she would agree with the Defendants and would not be punished after the institution of the public prosecution of this case. Thus, the victim's expression of intent not to prosecute a case that cannot be prosecuted against the victim's expressed intent or his/her wish to punish is withdrawn, and thus the public prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 (6)

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.