The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On September 18, 2018, the summary of the facts charged: (a) around 11:00, the Defendant assaulted the victim by assaulting the Defendant on two occasions by taking the victim’s left face of the victim’s clothes and hair in the sixth floor of the building Hanam-si, Hannam-si, by taking the victim’s clothes and head into consideration; (b) twice the victim’s clothes and head; and (c) turning the victim into head.

2. In a criminal trial for determination, the burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, it is inevitable to determine it with the benefit of the Defendant.

There are evidence that the defendant committed assault against the victim by making the victim's head several times, such as the witness D's legal statement, the police's protocol of interrogation of D's suspect, and the police's statement of E.

However, during the police protocol of E, the part of E’s statement that seems consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, that is, the Defendant changed his head while referring to “if any.”

(No. 30 of the Evidence Records) The portion in question is inadmissible unless E denies denies that it did not make any such statement in this Court.

In addition, it is difficult to believe that the police of D and each of the statements in this Court are reliance on it as follows.

① The Defendant, from the police to this court, only took the head of the Defendant, who was assaulted by D at the time, and consistently stated that he was unsatisfyed by her head.

② At the time of the initial examination conducted by the police, D state that “the defendant was sweaked with his head, sweeted by sweet,” and statements made by the police three times including those.