1. Without the specific time of commuting to and from get off work and without the employee’s signature, the “original” cannot be used as valid evidence. 2. The second part of the fingerprint punch-out printout without the signature of the employee, "originally" cannot be used as valid evidence. 3. There are two people working overtime for about three hours every day for three months (these two are managers), which is reasonable. 4. There are 3 days where 2 people in each group check in on the same day, 2 times - 2 days, 1 time - 3 days, and 1 person checks in 2 times - 2 days in the same month. The clock-in time is correct, and there are several people who clock-in the clock time exactly once or twice a month. This is unreasonable, and the employer needs to give a reasonable explanation, otherwise there is a possibility that the unit may falsify attendance records. 5. Unreasonable clocking in cannot be used as evidence. 6. The reason why it was said that "originally" is not used as evidence is because the latest Municipal Arbitration Commission and Municipal Intermediate People's Court documents have determined that as long as there is other evidence to support it, attendance sheets without employee signatures can also be recognized as valid evidence. 7. The above opinions of Nanjing lawyers are for reference only.