The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The black image attached to the investigation report No. 8 of the evidence list of misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (hereinafter “instant black image”) is inadmissible, and the Defendant has no record of committing larceny as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the basis of the black picture of this case which has no admissibility of evidence, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In the case of files containing relevant legal electronic documents, etc., the admissibility of evidence of the electronic document of this case is without the signature or seal of the originator or manager, taking into account the risks of editing and operating the electronic document by the author or manager’s intent or specific technology, it should be proved that it is a copy of the original without any artificial adaptation, such as editing in the duplication process, and if there is no such proof, it cannot be easily recognized as evidence. The fact that the copy or output of the electronic document submitted as evidence is copied without any artificial adaptation, such as editing in the duplication process, etc. It constitutes evidence or statement by a person who participated in the process of producing, transmitting, storing, etc. the copy or output of the electronic document file, comparison of the sea value immediately after the creation of the original or copy file, verification and appraisal results of the electronic document file, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do3169, Jul. 26, 2013; 2013Do3196, Apr. 29, 2016).