The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged is as follows: on December 21, 2016, the Defendant: (a) heard the victim’s F nurse at the nine-story D University Hospital of Daejeon on the 16:00 on the 16:0 on December 21, 2016, when the Defendant was heard by the nine-story D University Hospital of D University Hospital of D, D University Hospital of D University Hospital of D University Hospital of 16:00; (b) when the above sick nurse and the patient was unable to know the names of the above sick nurse, the Defendant sought the victim’s F nurse; (c) provided that he did not work but did not work

A complaint is filed, the qualification of nurse will be suspended if the complaint is filed, and the F nurse's reputation was damaged by publicly alleging the fact that the F nurse was not even aware of if the complaint was made early.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged through each evidence duly adopted and investigated in this Court, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that there was no reasonable doubt that there was an intentional intent to impair the reputation of a victim by publicly alleging a fact to the defendant.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

After F, the Defendant, who was a nurse, implemented the tiny with the Defendant’s mother (in order to secure the design, inserted the Guwawaus into the drafting, inserted the number of houses used for the tiny hole into the Guwa hole, and removed the tiny), seems to be found as the 9-story nurse test in order to confirm and resist the front of the mother’s tiny.

At the time, F was not working day, and was not a nurse test. At the time, the Defendant was talked with the nurse E, which was at the time of the above Switzerland, and the Defendant did not seem to have expressed the same content as that stated in the facts charged from the beginning, and it appears that the Defendant, while communicating with E, pointed out the violation of the Medical Records Act while pointing out the violation of the Medical Records Act, and led to a sound to the response of E (Evidence No. 23 of the evidence record, etc.).