Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
Third Conspirator: Therefore, at your vantage, Ere he express himself, or move the people With what he would say, let him feel your sword, Which we will second. When he lies along, After your way his tale pronounced shall bury His reasons with his body. AUFIDIUS: Say no more: Here come the NAME_1. All The NAME_1: You are most welcome home. AUFIDIUS: I have not deserved it. But, worthy NAME_1, have you with heed perused What I have written to you? NAME_1: We have. First Lord: And grieve to hear't. What faults he made before the last, I think Might have found easy fines: but there to end Where he was to begin and give away The benefit of our levies, answering us With our own charge, making a treaty where There was a yielding,--this admits no excuse. AUFIDIUS: He approaches: you shall hear him. NAME_2: NAME_3, NAME_1! I am return'd your soldier, No more infected with my country's love Than when I parted hence, but still subsisting Under your great command. You are to know That prosperously I have

Summary:
1. NAME_2, upon returning home as a politician, finds himself accused of being a spy by Aufidius and other NAME_1, who call for his imprisonment.
2. Despite NAME_2' attempts to defend himself and the intervention of some NAME_1, the conspirators ultimately take his life.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "N