Defendant

A From early 2010 to January 19, 201, the Defendant posted approximately 213 photographs of the five-story Seoul Mapo-gu Office B’s Internet homepage (F), and “H, a victim’s art work, without the consent of the victim G, on the Internet homepage (F) at the five-story Seoul Mapo-gu Office B, Seoul Mapo-gu, and without the consent of the victim’s G.

As such, the Defendant infringed the victim’s copyright.

B. Defendant B, at the time and place indicated in the above paragraph (a) above, the Defendant posted a photograph as to the Defendant’s business and infringed the victim’s copyright by posting it.

2. Determination

A. In order to recognize a violation of the Copyright Act, the actor must have the intent of the infringement, and in order to recognize the intention, it is necessary to recognize the infringement of author’s property right. The actor may be acknowledged if he knows the content of the right or if he knows the existence of the right, even if there is no accurate awareness about the content of the right.

B. As to the instant case, the following circumstances revealed by the record, namely, ① the Defendants entered into a contract with the photograph copyright holder to entrust, manage, and sell copyrighted works, ② the Defendants managed the database after obtaining photographs from the photograph copyright holder, and managed the database, so-called so-called “management,” and ② the Defendants and the third parties agreed that the photograph copyright holder shall bear all the responsibility when there is a dispute regarding the copyrighted works between the Defendants and the third parties (see Article 6 of the Agreement attached to Investigation Records No. 229 pages). ③ In 2002, the Defendants agreed that the photograph copyright holder shall bear all the responsibility for the copyrighted works (see Article 6 of the Agreement attached to Investigation Records No. 229 pages).