The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: at the end of May 2013, the Defendant posted a public notice on the victim’s “D religious organization’s smartphone fluorium fluorium and Kakakao Stockholm,” “F.m. all D religious organizations shall be deemed to have become f.m. E in f.,” “a family shall be discarded, and happiness with D religious organizations shall be f.m.,” “a family shall be discarded, and f.m. shall be returned to D religious organizations”, “a family shall have been abandoned, and f.m., f., f.s., f., of the victim’s smartphone fluorium and Kakaooo Stockholm,” “I will be f.m., f., f., f., f., f., f., f., of the victim’s smartphone f.,” and “I will receive it.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

2. The judgment is the case falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the will expressed by the victim in accordance with Article 312(2) of the Criminal Act.

However, according to the statement of withdrawal of a complaint prepared by the victim bound in the trial records, it can be acknowledged that the victim has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on January 7, 2014, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.