The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant, along with the victim B (22 s and inn) at the entrance of the “C” restaurant, committed a fluorcing of the victim’s friendship at the entrance of the “C” restaurant, and the fluor was a dispute with the fluorcing of the fluor in D “D” restaurant, and the fluorcing of the fluorc was first at the fluor.

On July 4, 2015, around 09:50, the Defendant: (a) placed a victim who gets a private taxi into the taxi on the scam of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Slcheon-ro, 330. On the scam on the scam on the scam of the mountain park; (b) threatened the victim with not having the scam in his house unless he is the scam of the victim; and (c) threatened the victim by taking action against the victim, such as taking action

2. Reasons for dismissing the public prosecution: Article 283(1) and (3) of the Criminal Act; Article 327 Subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act (a letter of withdrawal of a complaint containing an expression of intention not to punish the victim on March 7, 2016)