1. As to the quotation of a work already made public, Article 28 of the Copyright Act provides that “a work made public may be quoted for news reports, criticism, education, research, etc., in conformity with fair practices within the reasonable scope.”

In order to fall under this provision, the purpose of the quotation is not limited to news reports, criticism, education and research. However, the “justifiable scope” of the quoted refers to the relation (i.e., the quoted work is the principal and the human work is the paper) in which the quoted work has an incidental nature as to the quoted work after using the quoted work in the form of expression of the quoted work (i.e., the quoted work is the principal and the human work is the paper). Furthermore, the determination of whether the quoted work conforms to a fair practice within a reasonable scope should be made by comprehensively taking into account the purpose of the quotation, nature and quantity of the work, the method and form that contains the quoted work, the method and form of the quoted work, the general concept of the reader, and whether the demand for the cited work is substituted,

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do5835 Decided February 15, 2013, etc.). According to the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the Defendant partly quoted “F” and “G” as the victim’s author’s author’s author’s author’s book in Chapters I through III, VII, and VIII (hereinafter “instant author’s book”). Based on the author’s author’s book, the part is up to 11% to 40% per head, and the Defendant entered the victim’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s written author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s written author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s written author’s author’s author’s author’s author’s written author’s author’s author’s author’s written author’s written author’s written author’s written.