All prosecutions against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The part concerning Defendant A

A. On December 15, 2016, at around 21:00 on December 21, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the victim, who is the main business owner of the 4nd floor E of the D Building in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, on the part of the victim F (47 years old) of the victim F (the main business owner of the 47th floor) who was the above party room, “If he sits in the party room, he shall be the front door, and the repair cost shall be high, and the repair cost shall be high.”

B. Determination 1) Applicable Article 260(1)2 of the Criminal Act: Article 260(3)3 of the Criminal Act provides that on June 29, 2017, after the institution of the instant indictment, a written agreement is submitted to the effect that the injured person does not want to be punished for Defendant A: Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act

2. According to Article 254(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning Defendant B, the prosecutor shall institute a public prosecution by submitting a written indictment in which the name of the defendant, other matters identifying the defendant, and facts charged, etc. are stated.

However, according to the records of this case, the indictment of this case does not include all the facts charged against Defendant B.

Thus, the prosecution of this case against Defendant B constitutes a case where the prosecution of this case is null and void as it violates Articles 254(1) and 254(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provide the method of indictment, and thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 2 of the Criminal Procedure