The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Indictment

A. On May 2017, the Defendant made a statement that “The Victim E’s mother obtained a apartment house in the same F apartment unit as the F apartment unit in which C and D are heard from the office of the Defendant at the Seocho-si, Seocho-si, 2017, and that “The Victim E lives together with the victim’s seat.”

However, there was no fact that the victim had entered the apartment of G and had lived together with G.

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

B. On May 2018, the Defendant: (a) stated that “A victim was in a incompetence relationship with the victim, who was heard by J at “Ik” located in H at the Seocho-si from May 2018; and (b) said that “A victim was in a incompetence relationship with the victim.”

However, the victim was not in a bad relationship with G.

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

C. On May 2019, the Defendant of defamation, around May 2019, told the victim and G to travel abroad as if he were in an inhumane relationship with the victim, such as, “I have to travel abroad, there is evidence,” while the Defendant was hearing M in K apartment L in the Seocho-si, Seocho-si, 2019.

However, the victim was not in a bad-wheeled relationship with G, and there was no fact that overseas travel was made.

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

2. Each of the above facts charged is a crime falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 312(2) of the Criminal Act. According to the written agreement and written application for non-prosecution of punishment, the victim may have withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.