beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. The facts charged C is the chairperson of the Seongdong-gu Senior Citizens Association D, the vice chairperson of the Senior Citizens Association, the F is the general director of the Senior Citizens Association, the chairperson of the D Women's Association, the defendant, the chairperson of the D Development and Operation Committee, and H is a village resident.
Defendant
The purpose of this Act is to oppose the establishment of a charnel to be operated by the J in Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City I and to prevent the establishment of a charnel house.
Defendant
On March 8, 2014, 11:00, the victims K, who is widely known by the J in Gyeyang-gu I located in Seoyang-gu I, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul, sought to interfere with the abortion consciousness and the Sam-gu non-permanent law meeting.
Defendant
At the above temporary border hall, the person who was forced to enter the banner installed by the defendant, etc. in order to interfere with the scarcity and the scarcity 2 in order to intentionally contain the music broadcasting sound, and prevent the entry of the entrance of the marina to the above J, and the removal of the banner installed by the defendant, etc. in order to interfere with the above scarcity scarcity and the scarcity scarcity scarcity scarcity scarke, and the removal of the banner by the scarcity scarcity scarcity scar, and the removal of the banner by the scarcity scar scarcity scar scar scar scar
2. The Defendant consistently changed from the investigative agency to the court of this case to the effect that the Defendant did not interfere with the worship, such as abortion, due to the lack of any fact from the J on the day of this case.
As evidence corresponding to the facts charged in this case, K has a statement and a complaint in this court and investigative agency.
However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, the defendant's village residents H, G, C, F, and E, who had taken the place of J-B at the time of the establishment of the organization, stated that the defendant was unable to be deemed the defendant on the day of the instant case, due to the same agreement between H, G, C, F, and E. The defendant's appearance cannot be found even after examining all photographs taken by the scene of obstruction of worship at the time the records were attached to the court, and the court at the time as the subject of the J