The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant merely carried a document file with a higher level for temporary use, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had an intention to obtain unlawful acquisition.

B. Part 1) The Defendant, a victim’s association, is the victim’s association (hereinafter “victim’s association”).

(2) Although there is a fact that the back page used by the office was abandoned, it cannot be the object of the crime of causing damage to a document, since it is a thing in a state where the two sides of the back page of the time were used in writing, and thus the object of the crime of causing damage to a document cannot be the object of the crime of causing damage to a document, and there is no fact that the “documents, such as a visit proposal, an event document, and a letter of association introduction,” as stated in the facts charged. 2) In the course of organizing an electronic document (computer file) at the victim’s planned office at the victim’s request, the Defendant determined that the file concerning the existing event materials, etc. was unnecessary to the victim’s association, and deleted the file, and thus the Defendant cannot be said

2. Determination

A. According to the Criminal Act regarding larceny, a theft refers to the removal of possession of another person's possession against the will of the possessor and the removal of another person's possession to the latter's or a third person's possession. The illegal acquisition necessary for the establishment of larceny refers to the intention of excluding right holder and using and disposing of another person's property in accordance with the economic usage, such as his/her own property. It is sufficient that the mere infringement of possession alone cannot constitute larceny, but it does not require the intention of sustaining the economic interest of the property permanently. It is sufficient that the intention of infringing on ownership or the equivalent right, i.e., the intention of acquiring ownership or the equivalent right, regardless of whether he/she intends to obtain the value of the property.

Supreme Court Decision 206 March 24, 2006