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

Document:
A Romanian court on Tuesday agreed to extend former kickboxer and social media influencer NAME_1's detention on suspicion of human trafficking, rape, and forming an organized crime group for another 30 days, according to reports. NAME_2 was arrested on Dec. 29. 2022, with his brother NAME_3 and two Romanian women after Romanian authorities raided their Bucharest properties and held them for 24 hours. As of Tuesday, none of the four detainees has been formally charged. NAME_1 DETAINED IN ROMANIA ON SUSPICION OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING: REPORTS The Associated Press reported that a spokesperson from Romania's anti-organized crime agency DIICOT, NAME_4, said a request by the prosecutor to continue to hold the Tates for 30 more days was approved by the Bucharest Tribunal. The two Romanian women are to be placed on house arrest. Tuesday's extension was the third one granted since the Tates were arrested at the end of 2022. On Jan. 20, a judge ordered to keep the Tates behind bars as an investigation into their affairs continued. The AP reported that the judge considered the "particular

Summary:
1. Former kickboxer and social media influencer NAME_1 and his brother were ordered to spend another 40 days in detention as investigators look into accusations against them.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or  There should be exactly 6 paragraphs separated by the markdown divider: ***.
user