A. The Plaintiff is a copyright holder, such as “D”, “E”, and “F,” which are computer programs. 2) Defendant B Co., Ltd. (formerly changed on February 27, 2017: G: hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a company established for the purpose of consulting on computer equipment, consulting on software, development and supply, etc., and Defendant C is the representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd.

B. The Defendants’ copyright infringement and criminal punishment against the Defendants were indicted on January 4, 2016 on the part of the Defendant Company’s employees, including the Plaintiff’s H2, I 4, J 9, K1, L1, M1, N1, N2, etc. total market value of 20 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant program”), including 67,856,20 won in total, on the computers installed in the Defendant Company’s office, and used it for business purposes. The Defendant Company was charged with a violation of the Copyright Act under which the representative director of the Defendant Company infringed on the copyright as seen above, and each of the above summary orders was finalized around October 17, 201 by the Cheongju District Court Decision 201Da721212, Oct. 17, 2016.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the ground for appeal

2. According to the above facts of recognition of liability for damages, the defendants committed a tort that infringes on the plaintiff's property right to the program of this case.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from the tort.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion Defendants are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the amount ordinarily entitled to exercise the right as damages under Article 125(2) of the Copyright Act, and the instant program.