The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. At around 19:00 on April 1, 2014, the Defendant: (a) stated the Defendant that “A victim E was suffering from these wounds due to one’s behavior to B,” and indicating one copy of the victim’s name diagnosis; (b) “Isn’t know. I do not know. Isn’t know. Isn’t fl’t fl’t fl’t fl’t fl’s nor fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’s fl’.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen a medical certificate on the market value of the victim's ownership.

B. The Defendant: (a) at the time and place indicated in the victim’s paragraph of assault, and (b) at the time and place, when F, who was the child of the said victim, tried to recover the diagnosis that was stolen by the said victim, and fleded to avoid any defect, the Defendant got the victim out of the floor by cutting the part of the victim’s arms once and allowing the victim to go beyond the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the thief court, the defendant was only found to have taken a copy of the diagnosis from the victim and read it, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was also a theft, such as catching a medical certificate.

It is difficult to recognize that the defendant had the intention of larceny, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. The victim E’s statement that seems to correspond to this part of the facts charged of the assault is not reliable in light of the witness F’s legal statement, etc., and other evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is difficult to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. The instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, the Defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the Defendant’s judgment pursuant to Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act