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

Document:
He was speaking in a BBC interview after a Russian court declared him "under arrest in absentia" over the 1990s murder of a Siberian mayor. "Definitely I'm considering asking for asylum in the UK," he said. NAME_1 "sees me - it's obvious now - as a serious threat", he said. Once Russia's richest man, the former head of the now defunct Yukos oil firm spent 10 years in a Siberian prison on fraud charges, which he says were politically motivated. NAME_1 pardoned him in 2013 and he now lives abroad, mainly in Switzerland. "I'm considered by President NAME_2 as a threat, economically, because of the possible seizure of Russian assets abroad, and politically, as someone who will potentially help democratic candidates in the coming 2016 elections," he said. Russia will hold elections to the lower house of parliament - the State Duma - next year. The Duma is

Summary:
1. Former Russian oil tycoon NAME_3 Khodorkovsky has said he is considering seeking political asylum in the UK because he is considered a "threat" to President NAME_4 NAME_2.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
 Respond with more than 150 words.
user