The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. In the facts charged, the Defendant is a clerical error in the E middle school “E” in the wife population D, and the Defendant is a clerical error in the H middle school.

the head of the student department is the teacher of the department.

On November 26, 2015, the Defendant held a school violence autonomy committee with respect to the student F's sexual harassment damage case and student G violence damage case in the above E secondary school, and the student F was subject to a disciplinary measure for 30 hours of half-time replacement and special education of students, and G was subject to a disciplinary measure for 4 hours of special education of students.

Students I, while the disciplinary action against student F was due to his inception (inception) and was charged with the student F, ordered the above disciplinary action against the student F to prepare a written application stating that the above disciplinary action against the student F is an unfair disposition due to lack of fairness, and was directed to the student J such as the student F on December 4, 2015, and the student F and the student J also received an additional signature from 12 of the same half of the same half of the same half of the same half of the students.

Around December 4, 2015, the defendant confirmed the above facts, and around 13:20 on December 4, 2015, the defendant ordered I to receive the above written application from the victim student F, and then I received the above written application from I, and around 13:40 on the same day, I would like to have I write the above written application into the vehicle scraper in front of the defendant's viewing.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the application of the victim F, as seen above.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that the indictment procedure is unlawful, the summary of the argument 1) The indictment of this case is based on the F’s decision to institute a public prosecution by the High Court based on the F’s request for the ruling of K’s statutory representative.

An application for the adjudication of the crime of destruction of documents can be filed only by a person who filed a complaint with the right to file a complaint, but the ownership of the application broken in this case is not F.