Each public prosecution against the Defendants is dismissed.

1. The facts charged against the Defendants are related to the relationship between Defendant A and Defendant B, and the victim D (the 65 years of age, South Korea) and the son may know. (1) Defendant A committed assault, such as assaulting the victim’s head to the floor of the victim, on October 16, 2017, on the ground that the victim, who was spared with Defendant B during the session of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu for the 3-4 platform in the direction of the large 196 (Sol-dong) to the session of the 196 (Sol-dong) and the large 3-4 (Sol-dong) on October 16, 2017, would be bad.

2) On October 16, 2017, around 23:30 on October 16, 2017, Defendant B assaulted Defendant B, on the ground that the injured party spared with Defendant A from the 196 session of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul Dongdaemun-gu, and the 3-4 platform of the 196 session of the major railway station, and the 3-4 platform of the 196 major railway station, with Defendant A, would be bad, and the injured party spared with Defendant A.

2. The offense following the facts charged against the Defendants is respectively an offense falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, and the offense cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

According to the trial records, the victim D withdraws his/her wish to punish the Defendants on May 24, 2018, which was after each indictment was instituted against the Defendants.

Ultimately, this case constitutes a case in which a victim’s expression of intent to punish the victim is withdrawn for a case which cannot be prosecuted against the clearly expressed intention of the victim, and thus, the prosecution against the Defendants is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.