The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court and the first instance court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the instant facts charged was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations; the scope of application of the provision on the protection of works by unspecified and unspecified persons; the definition and scope of “technical protection measures” under Article 2 subparag. 28 of the former Copyright Act (amended by Act No. 9785, Jul. 31, 2009; hereinafter “former Copyright Act”); or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.