A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a company that operates the business of developing and selling letters.

The Defendant infringed the Plaintiff’s copyright by posting the pictures of the decoration, in which the “HU award” body (hereinafter “instant body”) developed by the Plaintiff was used, on its website.

Therefore, the Defendant, as damages, should pay to the Plaintiff KRW 7,590,000 corresponding to the usage fees, etc. of the instant letter, and damages for delay.

B. The relevant legal principles do not explicitly stipulate the content of the literary work or the protection of the literary work in a book. The applied art works created for the main purpose of the practical function are protected as a copyrighted work only in the case of a creative work belonging to the scope of the art because they have independent artistic characteristics or values separate from the practical function (see Supreme Court Decision 94Nu5632, Aug. 23, 1996). Meanwhile, in the case of a book-type program, it constitutes a computer program rather than a simple data file, and its creativity is recognized as being expressed in the production of a book-type file, and the reproduction, transmission, and distribution of the book-type file as a computer program is protected as a copyrighted work, but the use of the book-type copy expressed by the book-type program constitutes copyright infringement, i.e., the result expressed by the book-type program does not constitute a copyright infringement unless the book-type itself constitutes a creative work (see Supreme Court Decision 94Nu5632, May 23, 2015).

Judgment

In light of the relevant legal principles as seen earlier, the draft of this case’s letter constitutes a work subject to protection under the Copyright Act only with the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone.

or the Defendant directly approaches the instant body program itself.