The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On June 27, 2018, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant sold the real estate that he had resided together with the victim B (n, 50 years of age) and became only at a real estate intermediary on the remainder payment date.

On December 27, 2018, the Defendant asserted that “D Real Estate” located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D” wishes to receive any balance from a purchaser, and that he/she wishes to have a balance from a victim. The dispute commences, the Defendant took place, took a bath to the victim, took a dular, and assaulted twice the victim’s head with a file containing a real estate transaction document.

2. The judgment was based on the case that falls under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records of the written application for non-prosecution of punishment filed in the records, the victim has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on August 12, 2019, which was after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.