The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of each acquittal judgment against Defendants B and C is publicly announced.

1. Defendants are K apartment residents. The facts charged are K apartment residents.

On August 10, 2015, around 06:00 and around 06:00 on August 19, 2015, the Defendants interfered with the business of the O company in a manner that is located at the site of the construction project site of the “N” in the “L” immediately adjacent to K apartment immediately adjacent to the K K apartment for a two-day period, with legitimate permission, and the O company carried out a set-off business, and the agent who is removed from the place of the construction site is removed from the manager, and the “prevention of natural damage,” etc. is removed from the manager at the site of the construction site, and the Defendants interfered with the business of the O company in such a way as to prevent the use of trees from spreading or cutting down trees.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial. The conviction must be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to prove that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). (B) As evidence constituting the facts charged in the case of this case, there is a suspect's photograph, which is a closure of part of the usb images and above images against the defendants, but in the case of digital media, such as file, there is no signature or seal of the author, and in light of its nature, there is no risk of editing by the author's intent or the manager's specific technology, or if the contents are reproduced from the original, it cannot be proven that the original is a copy of the original without any artificial editing process (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3797.208.).