The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of this judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

1. The summary of the facts charged: “2015 Highest 4883” (the beginning of the case) was: (a) around May 22, 2013, the president of the HH golf course located in G with F interest Macheon-si; (b) at the latest night, Defendant A, who was an employee of the said golf course, was found to have been physically contacted with Defendant A, including, but not limited to, around 30 minutes of the said golf course in order to meet the resignation of Defendant A as an employee of the said golf course at the latest night; and (c) during Germany’s course, Defendant A, who took part in the said behavior of Defendant A at the time, took a physical contact with the said golf course staff, etc., including, but not limited to, KRW 30 minutes of the said golf course; and (d) around May 23, 2013, Defendant A, who thought that I would not take part in the said behavior of the said case, became aware of the content of the instant case to the employees of the golf course.

From around 1 year to 2014, the above golf course employees formed a labor union with a complaint against the tension management and frequent common sense in accordance with I’s instructions, and began to collect cases of the I employees without permission. In the process, when this case begins to be discussed, E, the representative director of the above golf course, who was an employee of the above golf course, could talk about this case by phoneing to Defendant A through M through which he was an employee of the above golf course at the time when he was an employee of the above golf course. The fact that this case is being discussed in the labor union.

Accordingly, Defendant A, a father who was a criminal defendant of the above golf course around early September 2014, notified Defendant B of the contents of this case to Defendant B for the first time through another person. Defendant B, around September 22, 2014, knew Defendant B of the said contents. Defendant B, a studio of Defendant A’s dormitory at the time of the instant case, only N, a studio studio of Defendant A’s dormitory at the time of the instant case, was in fact in the instant case from his female, and then found the said E, and thereafter, it later.