저작권법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.
Defendant
A The above fine shall be imposed.
1. In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to deem that Defendant A was aware of the fact that Defendant A violated the F’s copyright.
Part 1 of the photo taken on March 15, 2013 and part 2 of the photo taken on March 15, 2013 (hereinafter “instant photo”). Defendant A received directly from the players the instant photograph 1.
② The first photograph of this case did not indicate the source, etc.
③ Defendant A explicitly stated that, upon requesting players to photograph, “the data received from the Incorporated Association M (hereinafter “instant Association M”)” was excluded.
B. Chapter 4 of the photograph taken on February 23, 2017, and Chapter 2 of the L/C photograph taken on April 8, 2017 (hereinafter “instant photograph 2”). Part 1 and 2 of the L/C photograph taken on April 8, 2017 (hereinafter “instant photograph 2”). Defendant A was provided with the instant photograph 2 by the instant association.
② As to the use of the instant photograph No. 2, Defendant A was confirmed in advance by the person in charge of the instant association to have no copyright issues.
③ Defendant A used the instant photograph No. 2 and indicated the photographer as “M”.
2. Determination as to the first photograph of this case
A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so long as there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633 Decided November 11, 2010, etc.). B.
Judgment
The following facts which may be recognized by the record and the record: