The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the video files recorded in each CD submitted by the prosecutor as evidence (hereinafter “the copy of this case”) were copied from CCTV installed at the site of this case, as they are, and their admissibility is recognized. Thus, the Defendant constitutes a crime of interference with business.

2. Determination

A. Of the evidence as to the facts charged of this case, the court below determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to prove the facts charged of this case, on the following grounds: (i) in the case of copy of this case, it is difficult to recognize the identity or integrity of the original as it is difficult to confirm that the original was made by copying the original as it was without any artificial opening, such as editing, etc. in the process of making it a copy of the original recorded at the time of the Defendant’s act; (ii) in the case of a copy of this case, it is hard to acknowledge the identity or integrity with the original; and (iii) in the case of a copy of this case, it is highly low probative value as evidence to prove the Defendant’s specific act by making it a uniform in the same form and content as to a similar case; and (iv) in the case of a witnessO and P’s statement, each of the legal statements made by the staff who was in charge of CCTV management at the time of the facts charged, and there is no independent value as a witness statement as to the facts charged.

B. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the records of this case, the copy of this case cannot be deemed to have been attested as a copy of the original without any artificial adaptation, such as editing in the duplication process, as it was reproduced from the original recorded in the field situation at the time.

① This case.